News | January '10 | Science or gut-reaction - which do you trust?
What is the truth about GM safety?
Is the truth of science retained by gene-technology? Or, is
your queasy gut-reaction to food altered with man-made DNA trying to
tell you something?
These are important questions because:
“All truth
passes through three stages.
First it is rejected.
Second, it is violently
opposed.
Third, it is accepted as
being self-evident.”
(Arthur Schopenhauer
1788-1860)
The biotech industry and government have been trying to convince us for
years that the safety of GM foods will become self-evident.
However, none of them seem to be so certain of this 'truth'
that they are willing to test it.
According to EU regulations, market authorisation of genetically
engineered plants and the food and feed derived from them must be
linked to an effective monitoring system for potential
problems. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) therefore
demands the 'monitoring' of GM foods on the market, although the
responsibility for deciding how to actually do this falls to the
Commission.
In reality, monitoring can only be specified if a risk which can be
monitored has already been identified. Without this, the
monitoring becomes 'general surveillance' without any specific
scientific investigations. “So the risk assessment
and the system for monitoring move in circles. The risks of
genetically engineered plants are not thoroughly investigated during
risk assessment and therefore not subjected to detailed monitoring ...
(in other words, it is a) system of self-reinforcing
failures” (Risk
Reloaded).
So far, the EFSA has not proposed case-specific monitoring for any GM
plant. Even the European Commission has stated that, as there
are “no data whatsoever available on the consumption of (GM)
products – who has eaten what and when, ... in respect of
chronic conditions that are common, such as allergy and cancer, there
simply is no way of ascertaining whether the introduction of GM
products has had any other effect on human health”
(2005). In 2007, the EFSA admitted that no adequate systems
for deriving relevant epidemiological data have been established.
All this leaves your gut-reactions as the only real experiments ever
likely to be done on the safety of GM food.
Now, read all about GM MAIZE SAFETY IN DOUBT – News, January
2010.
SOURCE
Christoph Then and Christof Potthof, Risk Reloaded – Risk analysis of genetically engineered plants with the European Union, Testbiotech, October 2009