FDA GMO Labeling -- comment period

I was asked to cross post this notice by farmers over in the Farm Life forum because of the much wider importance to all eaters of this world. There are additional postings and links already in the thread of the same name as this one.

I encourage all to send comments to the FDA by April 3 during this comment period on the proposed rules regarding gmos and labeling.


FDA GE deadline - April 3 - Act Now

It is vital that US citizens respond to this consultation exercise before 3 April.

>TELL THE FDA THAT GENETICALLY ENGINEERED PRODUCTS
>MUST BE LABELED AND TESTED FOR SAFETY!

>The Food and Drug Administration is now accepting public
comment on its proposed new rules on genetically engineered(GE) foods. Despite overwhelming consumer demand, the FDA
has failed to require health and ecological safety testing
or mandatory labeling, and thus puts your health and our
environment at risk and deprives you of the right to know
or choose what you are eating.

>The proposed rules:

>* Do not require mandatory pre-market safety testing
>* Do not require pre-market environmental review
>* Do not require mandatory labeling of GE foods
>* Restrict voluntary labeling of non-GE foods
>* Require a mere letter of notification prior to the
marketing of a GE food
>* Fail to ensure public access to adequate information
for independent review
>* Are supported by industry and opposed by consumer groups

>The FDA needs to hear from hundreds of thousands of Americans that:

>* The FDA must require mandatory pre-market comprehensive
environmental review. Unlike conventional pollutants,
where a given amount of pollutant causes a limited amount of damage, a small number of mutant genes could have a population explosion and reproduce forever, causing unlimited and irreparable damage.

>* The FDA must require mandatory pre-market long-term health testing. GE products could be toxic, cause allergic
responses, have lower nutritional value, and compromise
immune responses in consumers.

>* The FDA must require mandatory labeling of GE products. Without mandatory labeling, neither consumers nor health professionals will know if an allergic or toxic reaction was the result of a genetically engineered food. Consumers would be deprived of the critical knowledge needed to hold food producers liable should any of these novel products be hazardous.

>* The FDA must end its cozy relationship with the industries it purports to be regulating. People have been allowed to work for a biotech company, then work for the FDA writing the regulatory rules on that company's product, then go back to working for the company. Ninety-two percent of FDA advisory committee meetings had at least one conflict of interest.

>PLEASE ACT TODAY. THE DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS IS TUESDAY, APRIL 3.
>
>Email your comments to: fdadockets@oc.fda.gov
> with "Docket 00N-1396 & Docket 00D-1598" in the Subject line

>Mail your comments to:
> Docket 00N-1396 & Docket 00D-1598
> Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305)
> Food and Drug Administration
> 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061
> Rockville, MD 20852

>For more information: www.organicconsumers.org , 218-226-4164

Well said!

If we don't voice our concerns,we'll all be reduced to human lab rats.

Think about it folks. This is serious stuff that 'your' government is doing. The Preamble of the Constitution says it all when our forfathers wrote...'WE THE PEOPLE,OF THE UNITED STATES.....'We are supposed to be the government,let Washington know how you feel. If you don't know,then it's time to do a little scary research and find out.

I think it's so important to know what we're eating. Labeling the food to indicate whether or not it's a GE product is the right thing to do. Then, we as consumers, can choose to eat them or not.

Terri

Further ammunition in support of the truth that safefy testing is not being done, received online this am.

Marsh

[Forwarded from GFA on behalf of NGIN http://members.tripod.com/~ngin ]


The following article by Professor Ann Clark on GM food safety research reaches an almost identical conclusion to my own independent six-month investigation of the data - namely that there are NO INDEPENDENT PUBLISHED RESULTS OF FEEDING TRIALS OF GM CROPS anywhere in the world. This is despite the fact that there are now dozens of GM foods that have been approved by various governments, despite the fact that there are now probably over 100,000 full time biotechnologist in the world and despite the fact that complaints about the absence of safety evidence have been made continually for over three years. Major publications such as Science, Nature and the Lancet have reached similar conclusions, as has the Royal Society of Canada, a committee of Irish GPs and the EU-US Biotechnology Consultative Forum. The fact - or the absence of facts, to be precise - is now indisputable. Government and industry spokespersons now defend GM foods only by declaring that "no-one has been harmed by them" but there is no monitoring going on to detect such harm. One can only conclude that there must be a strict and undeclared global moratorium on safety research to ensure that no proof of danger emerges - as Dr Pusztai and others have discovered to their cost.

Now is the time to write to MPs and Government Food Standards Agencies and Agriculture Ministries to demand an immediate Five Year Moratorium on GM food and crops to provide time for proper safety research - and to demand an end to what is obviously a global moratorium on such research.

ROBERT VINT, National Co-ordinator, GENETIC FOOD ALERT
coordinator@geneticfoodalert.org.uk www.geneticfoodalert.org.uk
Tel: 01803 868523
4, Bertram House, Ticklemore Street, TOTNES, Devon TQ9 5EJ UK

***********************************************

EXTRACT:
One common criticism in many such studies is the near absence of credible
scientific evidence upon which to assess environmental and food safety
risks. Last June, the prestigious journal Science reported a detailed
database search by Jose Domingo, who could find a grand total of just eight
refereed journal articles dealing with any aspect of the safety of GM
foods. The eight included only four actual feeding trials, of which three
were from Monsanto teams.

The final report of the elite, hand-picked EU-U.S. Biotechnology
Consultative Forum, which came out in December, 2000, stated, "There is a
lack of substantial scientific data and evidence, often (presented) more as
personal interpretations disguised as scientifically validated statements."
The full report is available at http://europa.eu.int


COMPLETE ARTICLE
***********************************************

"LUDDITES" GET SOME AMMUNITION
Prof. Ann Clark, Toronto Star [Canada] March 12, 2001 www.thestar.com

[Ann Clark is an associate professor of plant agriculture at the University
of Guelph].

"Last June, the prestigious journal Science reported a detailed database search by Jose Domingo, who could find a grand total of just eight referenced journal articles dealing with any aspect of the safety of GM foods. The eight included only four actual feeding trials, of which three were from Monsanto teams."

Thanks for posting that, Marshall. I wish I could say I was surprised but I'm not. How can we find out about Monsanto's feeding trials mentioned above?

Terri

This weekend I'll try and track down the article in Science online. I have a subscription to Science but to very few other science journals because they cost $100's to $1000's for annual subsciptions. Very few libraries carry science journals, even universities unless associated with a teaching medical school. I have a friend who spends $15,000 a year for memberships/technical journals. Phew!

Gaining access to abstracts online is not too hard but access to full texts and supporting materials is restricted to subscription holders, or you can buy the specific article for about $8 to $30 through online search/management company. Gets a bit expensive when the article is only 2-4 pages long and you want to look at dozens