The Ottawa Citizen | October 8, 1999
Joyce Groote, President, BIOTECanada, writes that it is reassuring that knowledgeable, well-informed individuals such as Gilbert Normand (Secretary of State: Science, Research and Development) are able to speak out on the benefits of biotechnology ("We're caught in a war," Sept. 29). Regrettably, the media, with little regard to balance, are absorbing the misinformation being peddled by the activist groups. All Canadians should be extremely concerned that a relatively small group of individuals is attempting to limit or eliminate our future access to biotechnology products.
Biotechnology is one of many ways to develop new products. It is being used to develop more nutritional foods, diagnostic kits to detect harmful bacteria that can cause illness, and medicines to cure diseases. Products of biotechnology are already demonstrating their benefits in many ways. In the area of medicine, consumers now have more options for diseases such as cancer and AIDS. For agriculture, biotechnology is already increasing food productivity with less environmental impact than most current farming practices.
In fact, in response to Michael Khoo's claims ("Modified food may be our nightmare," Oct. 3), farmers who have such narrow margins would not be growing these crops if there were no economic advantage such as increased yields and/or reduced pesticides use.
Biotechnology is not "new." Genetic engineering, one of the more recent tools of biotechnology, was used 20 years ago to develop insulin to treat diabetes. For agriculture, the first crops were tested in 1988. Since that time, the various products that have been developed have undergone extensive testing for both humans and environmental safety. Indeed, Canada enjoys a solid reputation internationally when it comes to food that is safe and nutritious.
The oft-cited example of soybeans modified with a gene from a brazil nut causing allergenicity is, in fact, a wonderful example of how well our system works. During the safety assessment of the soybean, Health Canada regulators determined that the modified product contained a protein that is a known allergen. Based on Health Canada's assessment, Pioneer Hi-Bred voluntarily stopped further work on this product. The end result is that this product never made it to supermarket shelves.
This technology has evolved at a rapid pace and is important to remain sensitive to the balance that social, scientific and political factors must play. It is therefore essential that all the information be available and that the conversation includes all parties, for informed Canadians to make up their own minds. In a democratic society, is it reasonable for well-funded but under-informed groups to dictate which products are available to all Canadians?
The opponents of biotechnology appear to be anti-science and allege that the technology itself is inherently bad.
It would be interesting to know how they would react to the introduction of electricity if it had just been discovered. Would they advocate the elimination of this basic technology because of the possibility that a toddler might poke a finger into a socket?
Or would they work to develop methods of reducing and avoiding the risks associated (e.g. inventing a plastic socket cover) to enable society to reap the extensive benefits of electricity?
