Safety and Labeling of GMO’s

Excerpted from : A statement to the Food and Drug Administration
Chicago, Illinois • November 18, 1999 http://www.cspinet.org/new/genetics_fda.html

Safety: One obvious concern about GMOs is that they might cause allergic reactions. In one prominent case, a company added to soybeans a Brazil-nut gene for a known allergen. Thanks to appropriate testing, the problem was discovered and the company never marketed the product. The FDA strongly encourages, but does not require, companies to conduct studies when a gene is transferred from a plant that is known to be a common allergen. Importantly, the Brazil-nut allergen gene was identified only because the allergen was known and could be tested for. But what if a protein newly introduced into the food supply causes occasional allergic reactions? Or if a new gene did not encode an allergen, but turned on dormant genes that did code for allergens? Or if a protein led to a behavior disorder, interfered with a medicine, or had other subtle effects? It would be difficult to identify such problems before or after marketing.

Another concern is that levels of naturally occurring toxins, such as solanine, might be increased in GM versions of plants. The FDA encourages companies to screen for such substances, but does not require them to do so and report to the FDA the results of their studies. It may be unlikely, but is not inconceivable, that a genetically engineered food would engender a novel toxicity, as suggested by the recent study, published in The Lancet, of biotech potatoes.

Risks of allergic reactions may be small, but are real; other risks may be speculative, but are not non-existent. The possibility of requiring routine toxicity studies should be considered; at the very least more research in this area should be conducted.

Labeling: For people with multiple or severe allergies, or with general safety concerns, GMOs raise warning flags. Those people fear that foods they were always able to consume might harbor new substances to which they might be sensitive.

Second, many people are troubled by potential ecological effects of GMO crops, such as harm to wildlife or promotion of pesticide-resistant insects or weeds.

Vegetarians and people with certain religious beliefs may wish not to consume foods containing gene products derived from animals. Other people believe it is simply unethical to move genes between distant species, such as putting a gene from an animal into a plant.

Regardless of what one thinks of the validity of those concerns, labeling would enable those consumers to avoid biotech foods. Labeling is supported by most Americans, according to public-opinion polls.

“Ultimately, it is the food producer who is responsible for assuring safety.”
— FDA, “Statement of Policy: Foods Derived from New Plant Varieties”
(GMO Policy), Federal Register, Vol. 57, No. 104 (1992), p. 22991

Wisconsin residents:

"Do not have a fundamental right to own and use a dairy cow or a dairy herd;"

"Do not have a fundamental right to consume the milk from their own cow;"

"Do not have a fundamental right to board their cow at the farm of a farmer;"

"Do not have a fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of their choice;" and

Cannot enter into private contracts without State police power intervention.

Judge Patrick J. Fiedler's Decision in Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund vs Wisconsin Dept of Agriculture, 9 Sept. 2011


FOOD FREEDOM: Decentralize, Grow Your Own, Buy Local.