from a press release | October 7, 1999
WASHINGTON - In testimony delivered at a U.S. Senate hearing on food biotechnology, the National Food Processors Association (NFPA) strongly supported the safety of foods derived through biotechnology and the U.S. regulatory processes that oversee their safety.
"All foods must be safe, and extensive scientific research has shown that foods derived through biotechnology are as safe as traditional foods," said Dr. Jeffrey Barach, NFPA's Vice President of Special Projects.
"Furthermore, foods produced through agricultural and food biotechnology must meet the rigorous government standards designed to ensure the safety of any food marketed in the United States."
Dr. Barach made his comments in testimony at a hearing held October 6-7 by the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee to discuss the development of biotechnology and its potential applications in the agriculture and food sectors.
"Modern food biotechnology is extremely important in devising new ways to increase food production, improve nutrient content, and provide foods with better processing and storage characteristics," Dr. Barach stated. "The food industry also anticipates that future biotech food products will offer remarkable nutrition and health benefits to consumers. But, for the process that will create these new and exciting 'good foods' to move forward, it is vital that consumers know the food industry and the government have worked diligently to ensure the safety of all foods derived from biotechnology."
Dr. Barach noted that "The Food and Drug Administration has confirmed that biotech foods pose the same kinds of scientific and regulatory issues raised by non-biotech foods. During FDA's consultation and review process, the safety of the proposed food or food ingredient is closely scrutinized. Foods produced through biotechnology must also meet all other FDA or Department of Agriculture safety requirements. Clearly, this is a rigorous process for overseeing the safety of these foods - and it has worked well."
Dr. Barach pointed out that any foods derived from biotechnology must undergo a special evaluation and review by FDA if the sources of the newly introduced genetic material come from a food associated with allergies.
"The development and review process for food biotechnology is specifically designed to screen against the introduction of allergens into new food products," Dr. Barach said. "Moreover, if a food - either conventional or the product of biotechnology - contains a known food allergen, it must be clearly labeled to indicate this fact. The process of development and existing labeling requirements ensure that foods derived from biotechnology pose no special issues to consumers in terms of allergenicity."
In his testimony, Dr. Barach noted that, "FDA's policy is that no additional food labeling is needed to identify foods just because they are the product of modern biotechnology. However, if there are 'material differences' from the conventional form of that food - such as containing a known food allergen or having a significantly altered nutritional value - the food must be clearly labeled to indicate these important facts.
The food industry strongly agrees with FDA that what is not needed is labeling that merely indicates what plant breeding technique was used. We believe that FDA's labeling policy is science-based, and is designed to offer the consumer material information when issues of food allergies, health, or safety need to be addressed."
Dr. Barach added that, "It is important to note that voluntary labeling of foods is currently permitted, and segments of the industry can be expected to utilize such voluntary label statements to achieve product distinction for certain niche markets. Additional labeling requirements are therefore unnecessary."
Dr. Barach concluded that, "NFPA strongly urges the U.S. food regulatory agencies to proceed with their science-based focus on the safety of all food products, and to continue addressing the safety of foods derived through biotechnology within this context, rather than separately. To do otherwise would require diverting already stretched resources to address unsubstantiated claims against the safety of biotech foods made by technology critics."
