Who to believe? The GM food fray rages on

Date: Nov. 17, 1999
Time: 10:30 am

Groups such as Greenpeace and the Sierra Club charge that insufficient research has been done to ensure the safety of GM foods, while government and industry representatives maintain that the products are safe. The Food Biotechnology Information Network was created in May to provide the public with "balanced, science-based facts about food biotechnology and its impact on our food system," according to its Web site. The Guelph, Ont.-based organization includes representatives from government, the academic world, industry and others.

"We have seen a significant increase in the number of calls to the centre over the past 2 months and we had 53 calls last week alone," says Diane Wetherall, the network's executive director. "We are simply trying to provide the public with unbiased information on the issue."

Awash in criticism

However, just like the GM foods it was created to discuss, the new network itself is facing criticism. "This group is trying to present itself as a provider of balanced information, but that clearly is not the case," Greenpeace spokesperson Michael Khoo told eCMAJ Today. "I don't know how they can say they are balanced when they are just an industry front piece."

Wetherall points out that even the network's membership includes representatives from several companies with a stake in bioengineering, such as Monsanto and Ag-West Biotech, groups that oppose their efforts are welcome to join. She adds that the network's diverse membership allows for presentation of both the benefits and drawbacks of GM foods and ensures that the information provided is neutral and strongly credible. "We had one person call up and say protesters had told her that her child will develop deformities because she was feeding her baby bioengineered soy formula," said Wetherall. "This is the type of fearmongering we are trying to counter."

Khoo remains unconvinced of the network's neutrality and says that Greenpeace would not be interested in joining it until it had demonstrated "at least an inkling of a process to gather public input."

Worldwide debate

The GM-foods issue has sparked debate around the world and is likely to take centre stage at World Trade Organization trade talks in Seattle later this month. At issue will be the European Union's moratorium on approving genetically modified foods, which was a direct result of the public hue and cry over the safety issue. With the EU moratorium in place, many North American farmers fear they won't be able to sell their produce in Europe.

Health Canada, which oversees food safety in Canada, has approved 42 types of genetic modification in crops for food used in Canada, including: types of corn that are resistant to herbicides and some insects, potatoes that are resistant to Colorado potato beetles and tomatoes that ripen more slowly; among others.

Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency test the safety of GM food products by comparing a GM food with a conventional nonmodified food with a history of safe use.

This method, dubbed "substantial equivalence," is a prime target of protesters, who charge that the federal government has not directly tested for the potential health and environmental impact of GM foods.

Send a letter to the editor Envoyez une lettre à la rédaction