Today's 'New Scientist' (as I've said before, not noticeably anti-GMO) is
very concerned about both the concept and the control of genetically
modifying plants to produce therapeutic drugs. They ask, why use food
plants? (Answer - much more is known about growing them). They point out
that, whereas a distaste for plants genetically modified for flavour,
shelf-life or herbicide resistance could be dismissed as cranky, the fear
that a powerful drug might escape into a similar crop grown for food is a
very real one. The USDA is heavily criticised for its very feeble program
of regulating GMOs: for example, separation distances have been set quite
arbitrarily and the rules for keeping harvested crops segregated are vague
and possibly unenforceable. The article also points to loopholes - for
example, maize engineered to produce the protein Avidin (which is known to
be harmful to insects) doesn't come under control because the product isn't
a drug and the crop isn't being grown to kill insects. I guess that you
guys in the USA know more about this - any comments?
I note that, once the regulations are finally published, the public will
have 120 days to respond. I hope that you've all got your pens sharpened
ready?
As US food crops are an international rather than a domestic issue, I'd like
to have my say - can anyone give me the relevant USDA address? James White
is said to be the USDA's branch chief for biotech evaluations.
Tony N-S.
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
