US consumers challenge spread of biotech food
Date: 07-Oct-02
Country: USA
Author: Carey Gillam
Much of the modern-day lore surrounding genetic modifications to food has the ring of science fiction. But with real-life genetic alterations now embedded in a myriad of commonplace food products from produce to potato chips, Americans are starting to sit up and take their supper seriously.
From the West Coast to the East, grass roots consumer groups are lining up alongside a mix of scientists and environmentalists, challenging corporate giants to answer questions about what is happening to the food they eat.
"We don't necessarily know what we're doing," said Ignacio Chapela, a microbial ecology professor at the University of California at Berkeley and a member of a national committee of scientists studying the environmental impact of commercialized transgenic crops.
"We're making major transformations of the environment," Chapela said. "This simply calls for regulation."
SANDWICHES AND SALADS
In a landmark move, Oregon citizens are seeking to do just that, placing on their November ballot a measure that would require all foods containing at least one-tenth of 1 percent of genetically modified material to be labeled as such.
The measure extends to dairy and meat products derived from animals that have eaten genetically modified corn or other substances.
Opponents of the measure say it would create costly and complicated red tape, and would force senseless situations such as requiring deli operators and restaurants to label the sandwiches and salads they serve up.
"It is meaningless information that would come at a high cost for consumers," said Shannon Troughton, a spokeswoman for Monsanto Co..
Monsanto, a leading U.S. developer of transgenic corn, soybeans and other crops, including a transgenic wheat ready to be rolled out, is a staunch opponent of the proposed law.
The company is working with a group of other biotechnology companies and food industry giants such as General Mills Inc., Procter & Gamble Co. and PepsiCo Inc. to try to stop the labeling law. Together, they have chipped in nearly $4.6 million to the "Coalition Against the Costly Labeling Law."
The chief supporters of the bill have raised less than $85,000. Despite the powerful opposition, several other states, including California, Colorado and Vermont, are pursuing similar initiatives.
Oregon ballot organizer Katelyn Lord said opponents were exaggerating the law's complications. She said there were many reasons genetically modified food should be clearly identified, including a basic right of consumers to know what they are eating. Other worries include health and environmental concerns tied to biotech, as well as a philosophical unease about tinkering with nature.
"There are as many reasons as there are people," said Lord. "We label sugar, salt, calories ... and I don't think anybody questions whether or not we need to know that."
SCIENTIFIC UNKNOWNS
The United States leads the world in the production of genetically engineered food and has generally provided a safe haven for biotech crops, even as more than two dozen other countries have placed tight restrictions on genetically modified plants and food products.
With no established scientific evidence that genetically modified foods harm human health, U.S. regulatory agencies have approved a wide array of products, and federal law currently has no mandatory labeling requirements for genetically modified foods. Food industry experts estimate 70 percent of the products found on U.S. grocery shelves contain genetically modified ingredients.
St. Louis-based Monsanto has commercialized biotech seeds, particularly crops resistant to pests and weed-killing chemicals, so successfully that the company's genetic modifications are embedded in crops that cover millions of acres of U.S. farmland and make their way into both human food products and animal feed.
Farmers like the biotech crops because they make it easier to control weeds and bugs. Ongoing research is devel
