NurseWeek

Court lets 'engineered' foods go

By Tanya O'Connor
Health24News
October 13, 2000


	You've read the article. Now tell us what you think. Related sites Alliance for Bio-Integrity FDA

Washington (H24N). A coalition of food safety groups is criticizing a U.S. District Court decision upholding federal policies for genetically engineered (GE) foods.

The coalition, composed of public interest groups, scientists and religious leaders, sued the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for lax regulation over GE crops, which are those altered with genes from viruses, bacteria, fish and animals to increase resistance to pests, pesticides and inclement weather. For example, many genetically altered tomatoes have been bred to contain flounder genes to make the plant more resistant to the cold.

The FDA claims the court upheld the substance of its 8-year-old policy, which categorizes GE foods as "food additives" making them "substantially equivalent" to their natural counterparts, and therefore not requiring any special testing or labeling requirements.

Critics are concerned about the possible risks associated with the new technology, saying such crossbreeding could introduce new toxins and allergens into the food supply, help spread disease across species barriers, and create unpredictable mutations of genetic blueprints. They say the FDA won the lawsuit on technicalities: evidence after the FDA made its policy in 1992 could not be considered, and expert testimony against the safety of GE foods was disregarded since the scientists making the statements were FDA political appointees.

"The court's decision is based on technical aspects of U.S. administrative law and in no way rules that GE foods are safe," said Steven Druker, executive director of the Alliance for Bio-Integrity, the group coordinating the lawsuit.

In an official statement released shortly after the decision, the FDA announced, "The court deferred to FDA's view that genetically engineered foods as a class do not require premarket review and approval of a food additive petition. The court also accepted FDA's view that special labeling for genetically engineered foods as a class is not required solely because of consumer demand or because of the process used to develop these foods."

While the ruling sent shockwaves through the activist community, Druker is still optimistic about future regulation of genetically engineered foods. "This decision is clearly unsound. The Alliance for Bio-Integrity intends to appeal it, reverse it, and reinstate reason and responsibility in FDA policy," Druker said.