Plan Seeks to Boost Oversight of Genetically Modified Foods
The Clinton administration unveiled plans Wednesday to tighten federal oversight of genetically engineered food and provide more detailed information about these products to the public in a move designed to boost consumer confidence in agricultural biotechnology.
Under the new proposal, expected to become final next fall, biotechnology companies would have to notify the Food & Drug Administration four months before introducing a new gene-altered food or animal feed and provide scientific evidence to prove the item’s safety. That information would be provided to consumers on the FDA’s Web site. Currently, this notification is voluntary, and consumers must submit a written Freedom of Information Act request to access much of the data on biotech crops.
The agency won’t require food companies to label food that contains genetically modified organisms, something that consumer groups and some legislators have been pushing for. Because the plan doesn’t require additional testing or labeling, consumer and environmental groups say it does little for consumers.
“This plan is like fat-free food,” said Dr. Rebecca Goldburg, a senior scientist at Environmental Defense, a nonprofit group. “It’s not very good, and there isn’t much substance.”
The FDA will, however, draft a set of guidelines for food companies that want to label their products as being free of GMOs. Although some natural-foods companies are now putting that claim on their label, the guidelines would make food companies adhere to a universal set of guidelines designed to be “truthful and informative.”
“Right now, there are no guidelines for what GMO-free is,” says Michael Phillips, director of food and agriculture of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, a Washington trade group. “We need to develop a threshold because you can’t have zero-tolerance [for genetically modified ingredients]; it’s just not possible.”
In addition to the changes proposed by the FDA, the Department of Agriculture will also begin conducting its own research to certify that scientific tests designed to detect the presence of bioengineered ingredients in foods are accurate. And it will begin accrediting laboratories that use these tests.
Since the early 1990s, the FDA has treated genetically engineered crops just like any other foods. As long as the genes transferred produce proteins already in the food supply, the agency does not require premarket approval or special labeling.
The food industry, which has opposed labeling on the grounds that it would be too expensive and turn off consumers, applauded the plan.
“It enhances the openness and transparency of the regulation of food biotechnology, while at the same time reaffirming that the technology is safe,” says Brian Sansoni, senior manager for public policy at the Grocery Manufacturers of America.
Officials of the group hope to weigh in on the guidelines for GMO-free claims, to make sure they don’t imply superiority. They’d like to see the FDA approve labels similar to those used on hormone-free milk, which contain a disclaimer that the hormone has not been demonstrated a risk to human health.
The FDA expects to officially propose the guidelines and begin accepting public comment this fall.
Genetically modified crops, which began hitting the U.S. market in 1995, are designed to resist certain pests and herbicides or to stay fresher longer. More than half of the soybeans planted last year and 30% of the corn were made from biotech seeds, and through oils and sweeteners those products wind up in a huge number of processed products from corn chips to soft drinks.
To date, there is no scientific evidence that genetically modified food poses a threat to human health. However, critics charge that there hasn’t been enough research done to say that conclusively. A panel of the National Academy of Sciences recently concluded that although genetically engineered food is basically safe, the potential exists for undesirable effects such as allergic reactions and higher toxicity.
Because of this potential, governmental agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency have started reviewing their regulatory policies for biotech foods. And the administration is starting its own six-month review of the environmental regulations dealing with genetically altered crops.
“We need better coordination between the three agencies, and we need to make sure they’re adequately funded so they can get research done,” says Cliff Gabriel, a deputy director of the administration’s Office of Science and Technology Policy. “The biotech scene is moving so rapidly we need to make sure the research keeps up with all that.”
