May 7 2000 / N.Y. Times
Richard Caplan of the Washington-based U.S. Public Interest Research Group,
writes that the Clinton administration's new proposal regarding agricultural
biotechnology (news article, May 4) is a welcome acknowledgment that
current oversight needs improvement, but the proposal is inadequate.
The Food and Drug Administration has proposed making consultations
mandatory for institutions that are seeking to commercialize genetically
engineered crops, but has failed to announce a system for comprehensive
pre-market safety testing.
Allowing companies to voluntarily label their products as "free of genetic
engineering" is a bad idea. What we need is labeling for all genetically
engineered ingredients, and the proposal undercuts that.
Caplan says that his group and others recently filed a petition calling on
the administration for mandatory pre-market testing of all genetically
engineered foods, mandatory labeling and full environmental review.
This is the only system that would effectively serve the public's best
interests.
(posted without permission)
