Reprinted with permission from www.thecampaign.org, July 27, 2004, Reuters
U.S. regulators should monitor the safety of some genetically modified foods after they reach stores for any impact they might have on people's health, a panel of independent scientists said on Tuesday. A report by the National Research Council and Institute of Medicine also recommended that the government look at ways to trace bio-foods and meat from cloned animals by using bar codes on animal carcasses and other foods.
"Evaluation should continue after products are on the market, especially for foods with new substances or unusual nutrient profiles," the government-sponsored report said. The FDA conducts similar post-market monitoring of new pharmaceuticals to identify any harmful or unexpected side effects.
The fast-growing biotech industry, which has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in new crops, cautiously welcomed the report and said any future regulation should be science-based. The panel said the federal government should increase its scrutiny over foods whose nutritional quality is significantly altered by biotechnology.
Bettie Sue Masters, the panel's chair, told reporters the FDA should decide on "a case-by-case basis" how stringently it will monitor biotech products. "For those that warrant further evaluation, the committee recommends that safety assessments begin prior to commercial release of the product and continue in the post-commercialization phase when safety concerns are present," said Masters, a professor of biochemistry at the University of Texas.
The report also recommended that regulators require bio-food developers to give the public more details about essential nutrients, known toxicants and allergens in newly created foods. Panel members declined to estimate how much the changes would cost the industry if implemented.
"As policy-makers study this report to set a future course of regulation, the goal should be to reinforce the fundamental principles of existing regulation -- that all regulations are science-based," said Michael Phillips, vice president of the Biotechnology Industry Organization.
Some consumer advocates said the report didn't go far enough in its recommendations. "The report falls short of offering such basic recommendations as improving the current voluntary oversight at the Food and Drug Administration to a mandatory system," said Richard Caplan, food safety advocate for U.S. Public Interest Research Group
Back to top of document
