September 7, 2003 Sunday

Europeans shouldn't be used as guinea pigs for U.S. biotechnology

By RONNIE CUMMINS; Distributed by Knight Ridder Newspapers

Europe's moratorium on importing genetically engineered foods and crops from the United States is justified for a wide range of reasons -- including moral, nutritional, economic and environmental.

On May 13, the Bush administration filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization to force the European Union to accept the importation of genetically engineered foods and crops from the United States.

If the WTO rules in favor of the United States, Europe will either have to accept the importation of genetically engineered foods or face hundreds of millions of dollars in fines annually. The EU has maintained a moratorium on genetically engineered foods and crops since 1998.

In reaction, a broad cross-section of Europeans, including major food companies, supermarket chains, restaurants, farm and consumer groups, have announced that they will not grow, purchase or sell genetically engineered foods, no matter what the WTO says.

There are at least three major reasons the EU's moratorium on genetically engineered foods is justified.

First, genetic engineering or gene-splicing of foreign proteins into food is a radical and unpredictable new technology.

Even more alarming, these genetically modified organisms are not required to be safety tested or labeled by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration -- unlike new drugs or other food additives -- before they are placed on the market.

Respected groups like the British Medical Association have called for a global moratorium on genetically engineered foods and crops.

Second, there is mounting evidence that genetically engineered foods, nutritional supplements and crops are already harming humans and animals. In 1988 a genetically engineered nutritional supplement sold in the United States, L-tryptophan, killed at least 37 Americans and injured 1,500 more. The manufacturer, Showa Denko, has already paid out more than a billion dollars in damages.

In 1996 a genetically engineered soybean was pulled off the market just prior to commercialization when scientists learned that this genetically-engineered animal feed might get into the human food supply and set off life-threatening allergies in humans.

In 2000 this nightmare scenario became a reality, when a genetically engineered corn variety, Starlink, contaminated the U.S. corn supply and forced a recall of 300 brand-name products.

Even more alarming, in 2002 the U.S. Department of Agriculture admitted that experimental ''biopharm'' crops in Nebraska and Iowa, corn spliced with a powerful pig vaccine, had somehow contaminated non-genetically engineered crops destined for the food chain.

Finally, the EU is justified in maintaining its moratorium because consumers have an inalienable right to be able to choose what they feed themselves and their families.

Europeans do not want to be human guinea pigs in a vast genetic experiment.

The United States shouldn't try to force Europeans to consume potentially hazardous foods that a vast majority of Americans themselves would prefer not to eat.

Ronnie Cummins is the national director of the Organic Consumers Association (www.organicconsumers.org