Biotechnology has backing of global scientific community

July 26, 2000

Around the globe, the scientific community is becoming ever more united in support of agricultural biotechnology. The consensus of leading scientific bodies with interest in health and environmental safety worldwide is that crops produced through biotechnology offer many benefits and pose no more risk than crops produced through traditional crop breeding methods.

Among those who have spoken recently in support of agricultural biotechnology are:

              U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

        U.S. Food and Drug Administration (Commissioner Jane Henney)

        National Research Council (U.S.)

        Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

        World Health Organization

        Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

        National Academy of Sciences (U.S.)

        Royal Society of London

        Third World Academy of Sciences

        Brazilian Academy of Sciences

        Chinese Academy of Sciences

        Indian National Science Academy

        Mexican Academy of Sciences

        Australia New Zealand Food Authority

        American Society for Microbiology (represents 42,000 microbiologists)

        International Society for Plant Molecular Biology  (1,800 members)

        Society for In Vitro Biology (1,200 members)

        2,700 scientists who signed a Declaration of Support, including three Nobel Prize winners.

EPA conducted a review of crops that have been improved to control insects without the use of chemical insecticides and stated: "EPA is aware of no data indicating that unreasonable adverse effects on the environment have occurred. Moreover, EPA has no reason to believe that such effects may occur during the continued duration of the current registrations." (1)

FDA Commissioner Jane E. Henney, M.D., recently stated in an interview: "We have seen no evidence that the bioengineered foods now on the market pose any human health concerns or that they are in any way less safe than crops produced through traditional breeding." (2)

The National Research Council found "no strict distinction exists between the health and environmental risks posed by plants genetically engineered through modern molecular techniques and those modified by conventional breeding practices." (3)

The Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Health Organization reported on a joint consultation, stating: "The Consultation was satisfied with the approach used to assess the safety of the genetically modified foods that have been approved for commercial use." (4)

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, representing 29 developed nations, stated: "Risks associated with biotechnology-derived foods are not inherently different from the risks associated with conventional ones." (5)

The seven science academies listed above issued a joint statement on biotechnology, concluding that biotechnology "should be used to increase the production of main food staples, improve the efficiency of production, reduce the environmental impact of agriculture, and provide access to food for small-scale farmers." (6)

The Australia New Zealand Food Authority stated: "The level of safety associated with GM (genetically modified) foods is at least as high as that of all other available foods because the safety assessment process undertaken for GM foods is far more thorough than that undertaken for any other food. The safety assessment process ensures that GM foods provide all the benefits of conventional foods and no additional risks." (7)

The American Society for Microbiology statement says: "ASM is not aware of any acceptable evidence that food produced with biotechnology and subject to FDA oversight constitutes high risk or is unsafe. Rather, plant varieties created with biotechnology are grown more efficiently and economically than traditional crops." (8)

Science experts address multiple subjects

There is agreement in the scientific community in regard to many biotechnology topics and issues:

Crops produced through biotechnology have no greater risk than crops produced through conventional breeding techniques and in fact may offer advantages over conventionally bred crops.

"Conventional techniques are often imprecise because they shuffle thousands of genes in the offspring, causing them to have some of the characteristics of each parent plant…With the tools developed from biotechnology, a gene can be inserted into a plant to give it a specific new characteristic instead of mixing all o f the genes from two plants and seeing what comes out." – FDA Commissioner Jane Henney (2)

"The level of safety associated with GM (genetically modified) foods is at least as high as that of all other available foods because the safety assessment process undertaken for GM foods is far more thorough than that undertaken for any other food. The safety assessment process ensures that GM foods provide all the benefits of conventional foods and no additional risks."  -- Australia New Zealand Food Authority (7).

"Because of the improved precision and predictability of biotechnology, it can be anticipated that in the future food will be more,
rather than less, safe." – American Society for Microbiology (8)

"No strict distinction exists between the health and environmental risks posed by plants genetically engineered through modern molecular techniques and those modified by conventional breeding practices."  -- National Research Council (3)

"Both conventional and transgenic pest-protected crops could impact so-called nontarget species such as beneficial insects, but that impact is likely to be smaller than that from chemical pesticides." – NRC (3)

"Conventional breeding often involves the transfer of traits which are controlled by several interacting genes and often occurs without specific knowledge of which genes and gene products are involved. Therefore some of the plants produced by this method could have unanticipated properties. With transgenic (biotech) methods, there is often more knowledge about the genes and gene products being transferred." – NRC (3)

   "Traditional plant breeding methods include wide crosses with closely related wild species, and may involve a long process of crossing back to the commercial parent to remove undesirable genes. A feature of GM technology is that it involves the introduction of one or at most, a few, well-defined genes rather than the introduction of whole genomes or parts of chromosomes as in traditional plant breeding. This makes toxicity testing for transgenic plants more straightforward than for conventionally produced plants with new traits, because it is much clearer what the new features are in the modified plant." – Report of Seven Academies of Science (6)

"The potential occurrence of unintended effects is not unique to the application of recombinant DNA techniques but is also a general phenomenon in conventional breeding." – FAO/WHO joint consultation (4)

"In the past, numerous changes have been made in cultivated plants during traditional breeding with very little associated biochemical knowledge available to assist in their evaluation. If a gene introduces into the plant an essentially novel metabolic function, it is reasonable to assess its possible effects more carefully than normal." – OECD (5)

 "All plant breeding methods, traditional and modern, have the potential to lead to unexpected or unintended changes in concentrations of various substances in the plant. …None of these changes are unique to GM plants." – OECD (5)

"Modern biotechnology, like classical (breeding), has the potential to introduce allergens into foods. Safety assessments of GM foods usually include an assessment of the allergenic potential of newly introduced proteins…The aim (of biotech testing) is to ensure that toxicant levels are within the range of those in the safely consumed parent plant or related commercial species. Historically, such testing has not been performed systematically for plant varieties produced by traditional breeding." – OECD (5)

Biotechnology will be an important factor in global food security and addressing food and health needs of the developing world.

"The majority of speakers from developing countries stressed the crucial importance of GM technology as part of the armory for feeding their population in the future. In China, with 20% of the world's population and 7% of the land surface, GM is already playing a major role in food production, and its importance was also emphasized by speakers from Africa and Latin America….Most argued forcefully that GM is an essential part of their future food production…GM technology for the developing world should be carried forward through a mixture of public and private funding."  -- OECD Edinburgh conference (9)

"For the least developed countries in particular more food of improved nutritional quality will be needed as population growth continues. Distribution problems are real, as are post-harvest losses. But it is not realistic to assume that a strategy that does not incorporate increased local production of cheap food for consumers will work.  In judging new technologies, one should also bear in mind that the potential of present day agriculture to meet future demands is under strain. The area of available arable land is decreasing with urban development, and productivity growth is leveling off (partly due to the diminishing potential of "traditional" breeding technology). GM technologies, if developed under appropriate conditions, offer the potential of providing solutions." – OECD (9)

"Biotechnology would provide powerful tools for the sustainable development of agriculture and food production. Biotechnology can be of significant assistance in meeting the needs of an expanding and increasingly urbanized population in the new millennium." – FAO/WHO (4)

   "It is essential that we improve food production and distribution in order to feed and free from hunger a growing world population, while reducing environmental impacts and providing productive employment in low-income areas. This will require a proper and responsible utilisation of scientific discoveries and new technologies. The developers and overseers of GM technology applied to plants and micro-organisms should make sure that their efforts address such needs." – Report of seven academies (6)

"Today there are some 800 million people (18% of the population in the developing world) who do not have access to sufficient food to meet their needs, primarily because of poverty and unemployment. Malnutrition plays a significant role in half of the nearly 12 million deaths each year of children under five in developing countries.  In addition to lack of food, deficiencies in micro-nutrients (especially vitamin A, iodine and iron) are widespread. Furthermore, changes in the patterns of global climate and alterations in use of land will exacerbate the problems of regional production and demands for food. Dramatic advances are required in food production, distribution and access if we are going to address these needs. Some of these advances will occur from non-GM technologies, but others will come from the advantages offered by GM technologies." – Seven academies (6)

"It is important to increase yield on land that is already intensively cultivated. However, increasing production is only one part of the equation. Income generation, particularly in low-income areas together with the more effective distribution of food stocks, are equally, if not more, important. GM technologies are relevant to both these elements of food security." – Seven academies (6)

"Vaccines are available for many of the diseases that cause widespread death or human discomfort in developing countries, but they are often expensive both to produce and use. The majority must be stored under conditions of refrigeration and administered by trained specialists, all of which adds to the expense. Even the cost of needles to administer vaccines is prohibitive in some countries. As a result, the vaccines often do not reach those in most need. Researchers are currently investigating the potential for GM technology to produce vaccines and pharmaceuticals in plants…the development of transgenic plants to produce therapeutic agents has immense potential to help in solving problems of disease in developing countries."—Seven academies (6)

"Those who resist the advance of biotechnology must address how otherwise to feed and care for the health of a rapidly growing global population forecast to increase at a rate of nearly 90 million people per year." – American Society for Microbiology (8)

The concept of substantial equivalence is adequate to ensure the safety of foods produced through biotechnology.

"The concept of substantial equivalence contributes to a robust safety assessment framework. The consultation was satisfied with the approach used to assess the safety of the genetically modified foods that have been approved for commercial use.  (Substantial equivalence) embodies a science-based approach in which a genetically modified food is compared to its existing, appropriate counterpart. The goal of this approach is to ensure that the food, and any substances that have been introduced into the food as a result of genetic modification, is as safe as it traditional counterpart. (The substantial equivalence approach) is considered the most appropriate strategy for the safety and nutritional assessment of genetically modified foods…. There are no alternative strategies that would provide a better assurance of safety for genetically modified foods than the appropriate use of the concept of substantial equivalence." – FAO/WHO (4)

"Safety assessment based on substantial equivalence is the most practical approach to address the safety of foods and food components derived through modern biotechnology. Analyses of key substances provide increased assurance that substances important from a nutritional or health perspective are present in acceptable concentrations." – OECD (5)

"One important benefit of the substantial equivalence concept is that it provides flexibility than can be useful in food safety assessment. It is a tool, which helps identify any difference, intended or unintended, that might be the focus of further safety evaluation. …it is a comparative process (which) can be performed at several points along the food chaine (harvested unprocessed, processed foods, individual fractions, or final food product)" – OECD (5)

"The Food and Drug Administration is to be commended for constructing a framework for safety evaluation that is product based, and for taking the position that the critical consideration in evaluating the safety of (bioengineered) foods should be the objective characteristics of the food product or its components rather than the fact that new development methods were used." – ASM (8)

The benefits of biotechnology, especially when compared with other agricultural techniques, should be part of any discussion about risk.

"The consensus emerging from conference is that benefits of GM food need to be considered as well as the risks…. Novel products and their production technologies should be compared with products of existing technologies and not just looked at in absolute terms." -- OECD (9)

"Concerted, organized efforts must be undertaken to investigate the potential environmental effects, both positive and negative, of GM technologies in their specific applications. These must be assessed against the background of effects from conventional agricultural technologies that are currently in use." – Seven academies (6)

"The widespread application of conventional agricultural technologies such as herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers and tillage has resulted in severe environmental damage in many parts of the world. Thus the environmental risks of new GM technologies need to be considered in the light of the risks of continuing to use conventional technologies and other commonly used farming techniques." – Seven academies (6)

"Both conventional and transgenic pest-protected crops could impact so-called nontarget species, such as beneficial insects, but that impact is likely to be smaller than that from chemical pesticides. In fact, when used in place of chemical pesticides, pest-protected crops could lead to greater biodiversity in some geographical areas." – National Research Council  (3)

"EPA does not believe that there are any valid data demonstrating specific adverse impacts of plants expressing Bt endotoxins on beneficial non-target organisms. To the contrary, EPA believes that available scientific data and information indicates that cultivation of Bt crops has a positive ecological effect, when compared to the most likely alternatives." – EPA (1)

Biotechnology offers many current and potential benefits.

"GM food-based oral vaccines and nutritional supplements offer potentially great benefits. Though other technologies may be available, biotechnology potentially offers a  more practical and affordable option for least developed countries in the short and medium term." – OECD Edinburgh conference (9)

"Genetically modified foods with intentional nutritional effects may provide improved products for developed and developing countries." – FAO/WHO (4)

The seven science academies that studied biotechnology (6) identified many areas in which biotechnology is providing benefits or could solve important problems in the future. The academies recommended continued research and development to produce crops that will improve food production, give nutritional benefits, reduce environmental impacts of intensive agriculture and increase the availability of pharmaceuticals and vaccines.  Here are some of the benefits the seven academies identified:

... "It is possible that farmers in developing countries could benefit considerably from crops with delayed ripening or softening as this may allow them much greater flexibility in distribution than they have at present. In many cases small-scale farmers suffer heavy losses due to excessive or uncontrolled ripening or softening of fruit or vegetables."

.. "(The dwarfing technology that drastically increased wheat yields and led to the Green Revolution) can now potentially be used to increase productivity in any crop plant where the economic yield is in the reproductive rather than the vegetative parts."

... "Resistant transgenic varieties are currently entering field trials to test the effectiveness of their resistance to Rice Yellow Mottle Virus (RYMV). This could provide a solution to the threat of total crop failure in the sub-Saharan African rice growing regions…Numerous other examples (of virus resistant crops) could be given."

... "Vitamin A deficiency causes half a million children to become partially or totally blind each year (Conway and Toennissen 1999). Traditional breeding methods have been unsuccessful in producing crops containing a high vitamin A concentration and most national authorities rely on expensive and complicated supplementation programs to address the problem. Researchers have introduced three new genes into rice: two from daffodils and one from a micro-organism. The transgenic rice exhibits an increased production of beta-carotene as a precursor to vitamin A and the seed is yellow in color (Ye et al 2000). Such yellow, or golden, rice may be a useful tool to help treat the problem of vitamin A deficiency in young children living in the tropics.

... "Iron fortification is required because cereal grains are deficient in essential micro-nutrients such as iron. Iron deficiency causes anemia in pregnant women and young children. About 400 million women of childbearing age suffer as a result and they are more prone to stillborn or underweight children and to mortality at childbirth. Anemia has been identified as a contributing factor in over 20% of maternal deaths (after giving birth) in Asia and Africa (Conway 1999). Transgenic rice with elevated levels of iron has been produced using genes involved in the production of an iron-binding protein and in the production of an enzyme that facilitates iron availability in the human diet (Goto et al 1999, Lucca et al (it). (1999). These plants contain 2 to 4 times the levels of iron normally found in non-transgenic rice."

... "Soils subjected to extensive tillage (plowing) for controlling weeds and preparing seed beds are prone to erosion, and there is a serious loss of water content. There is a need to develop crops that thrive under (low tillage) conditions, including the introduction of resistance to root diseases currently controlled by tillage and to herbicides that can be used as a substitute for tillage."

...  "Vaccines are available for many of the diseases that cause widespread death or human discomfort in developing countries, but they are often expensive both to produce and use. The majority must be stored under conditions of refrigeration and administered by trained specialists, all of which adds to the expense. Even the cost of needles to administer vaccines is prohibitive in some countries. As a result, the vaccines often do not reach those in most need. Researchers are currently investigating the potential for GM technology to produce vaccines and pharmaceuticals in plants…the development of transgenic plants to produce therapeutic agents has immense potential to help in solving problems of disease in developing countries."

... "The real potential of GM technology to help address some of the most serious concerns of world agriculture has only recently begun to be explored."

Regulatory systems in place around the world are adequate to ensure that foods produced through biotechnology are safe, and there is no evidence that foods are not safe.

"The safety assessment process for GM foods is based on concepts and principles that have been developed through international orgasnizations such as the World Helath Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, and the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development…The level of safety of GM foods is at least as high as that of all other available foods because of the safety assessment process undertaken for GM foods is farm more thorough than that undertaken for any other foods." –Australia New Zealand Food Authority (7)

"With regard to health issues, tests on toxicity and allergenicity have been and are being conducted. So far none has shown significant toxic or allergenic harm. No peer-reviewed article on clinical trials or epidemiological study reporting adverse effects on human health has yet appeared. Where there have been indications of potential unacceptable effect, the present mechanisms have enabled us to identify them and prevent such products coming to the market." – OECD (9)

"Overall, national food safety systems are doing an effective job of protecting public health." – OECD Ad Hoc Council on Food Safety (10)

"(The researchers are) not aware of any evidence suggesting foods on the market today are unsafe to eat as a result of genetic modification. ..The federal agencies responsible for regulating transgenic plants have generally done a good job." – National Research Council (3)

"The Consultation acknowledges that for genetically modified foods, the premarketing safety assessment already gives assurance that the food is as safe as its conventional counterpart." – FAO/WHO (4).

"Much experience has been gained in the safety assessment of the first generation of foods derived through modern biotechnology, and those countries that have conducted assessments are confident that those GM foods they have approved are as safe as other foods...Most attention in the safety assessment of GM foods has been given to the detection and prevention of potentially occurring toxic effects, allergic reactions, unfavorable changes in nutrient composition, and the issues associated with antibiotic resistance genes." – OECD (5)

"Considerable confidence exists that modern sophisticated analytical chemistry and biochemistry techniques and food safety assessment procedures can ensure that GM foods are as safe as traditional ones." – OECD (5)

"There is no reason to suspect that the long-term safety of GM foods will be any less than that of conventional foods. The safety assessment process is designed to ensure that these foods provide all of the benefits of conventionally produced foods and no additional risks." – ANZFA (7)

There is much scientific agreement that properties of foods should be the target of risk assessment, not the process by which foods are produced.

"There is a widespread scientific consensus that in assessing risks, it is not the process applied in breeding but the genetic outcome and the trait it confers to the plant that matters." – OECD (5)

"I must emphasize that we believe it is the properties of a genetically modified plant, not the process by which it was produced, that should be the focus of risk assessments."—Perry Adkisson, committee chair, National Research Council committee on biotechnology (3)

"The ASM has long held the position that oversight and regulation should be based on the risk associated with products of biotechnology, and not on the processes used to create or produce these products. This is necessary not only to protect public health and the environment, but also to encourage continued biotechnological research and development which is in the national interest,and in the interests of the health and welfare of people worldwide." – American  Society for Microbiology (8)

"To label a product only because it is genetically modified would be punitive." – ASM (8)

"Traditional and bioengineered foods all are subject to the same labeling requirements. All labeling for a food product must be truthful and not misleading. If a bioengineered food is significantly different from its conventional counterpart – if the nutritional value changes or it causes allergies – it must be labeled to indicated that difference." – FDA Commissioner Jane Henney (2)

"There is no scientifically valid reason to treat possible gene transfer events involving GM organisms differently from those involving naturally occurring organisms. In any case, it is the gene and the trait it confers, and whether or not it brings a reproduction or selection advantage to the recipient organism that are crucial concerns when possible impacts of potential gene transfer are being considered." – OECD (5)

Crops produced through biotechnology can reduce the use of chemical pesticides.

"Human health and environmental benefits could arise from reductions in the application of chemical pesticides resulting from the commercial production of certain transgenic pest-protected plants." – National Research Council (3)

"Transgenic crops containing insect resistance genes from Bacillus thuringiensis have made it possible to reduce significantly the amount of insecticide applied on cotton in the USA. One analysis, for example, showed a reduction of five million acre-treatments (two-million-hectare-treatments) or about one million kilograms of chemicals insecticides in 1999 compared with 1998." – Seven science academies (6)

"Transgenic varieties have benefited many farmers in the form of reduced production costs, higher yields, or both. In many cases, they have also benefited the environment because of reduced pesticide usage or by providing the means to grow crops with less tillage…Genes for pest resistance…provide alternative opportunities to reduce the use of chemical pesticides in many important crops. In addition, lowering the contamination of our food supply by(insect-caused) pathogens that cause food safety problems (eg mycotoxins) would be beneficial to farmers and consumers alike." – Seven science academies (6)

"The overall result of cultivation of plants expressing Bt is that the number of chemical insecticide applications for non-target pest control is reduced…Densisties of (non-target, beneficial) insects are generally higher on Bt…crops than non Bt crops solely because the Bt crops are not subjected to spraying with nonspecific pesticides." – EPA (1)

"Analysis by USDA's Economic Research Service indicates that adoption of GE corn, soybeans, and cotton is associated with a decrease in the number of acre-treatments of pesticides (number of acres treated multiplied by number of pesticide treatments)."—Agricultural Outlook Summary, ERS-AO-273, July 21, 2000, approved by the World Agricultural Outlook Board

There is no greater potential for allergens to occur in biotech foods than in foods produced through traditional breeding. Furthermore, testing of biotech foods pays special attention to identifying potential allergens.

"Modern biotechnology, like classical biotechnology (conventional breeding techniques), has the potential to introduce allergens into foods. Safety assessments of GM foods usually include an assessment of the allergenic potential of newly introduced proteins…No allergy risk has been established at present for the GM products that have already been approved." – OECD (5)

"In considering the safety of new proteins in food, the possibility that a new protein may cause an allergic reaction in some individuals should be assessed…If the gene originated from a source known to cause allergic reactions, the assessment should include in vitro analysis (of the reactivity of the protein) with…blood serum of individuals with known allergies to the source of the transferred material. If serum reactivity is observed, a second tier of in vivo study should be performed (skin prick test). If this test is negative or equivocal, a…double blind, placebo-controlled food challenge with patients sensitive to the allergenic source of the gene is recommended. If the source of the GM food does not suggest the presence of proteins with allergenic potential, a comparison of certain properties of known allergens with those of the newly expressed protein(s) in the food is necessary in order to assess its allergenic potential. If a protein exhibits characteristics similar to a known allergen, further evaluation is recommended."  -- OECD (5)

"Food allergens are typically large proteins. They are often glycosylated, and are relatively stable to food processing and digestion. Of the huge number of proteins in the human diet, few are allergens." – OECD (5)

"If a genetically modified food contains the product of a gene form a source with known allergenic effects, the gene product should be assumed to be allergenic unless proven otherwise. The transfer of genes from commonly allergenic foods should be discouraged unless it can be documented that the gene transferred does not code for an allergen." – FAO/WHO (4)

"If (there is) scientific evidence that any new protein in a GM food were allergenic, it is unlikely that the food would be permitted to be sold…even with appropriate labeling. This is because it is considered inappropriate to increase the level of exposure of the community to allergenic proteins in the food supply." – ANZFA (7)

"It is important to know that bioengineering does not make a food inherently different from conventionally produced food. And the technology doesn't make the food more likely to cause allergies…To be cautious, FDA ha specifically focused on allergy issues. Under the law…companies must tell consumers on the food label when a product includes a gene from one of the common allergy-causing foods unless it can show that the protein produced by the added gene does not make the food cause allergies." – FDA Commissioner Jane Henney (3)

Antibiotic resistance markers in some currently registered products are safe, and new techniques will allow the phase-out of such markers in future products.

"Antibiotic resistance markers currently used in genetically modified plants have been previously reviewed for safety. (The consultation) concluded that there is no evidence that the markers currently in use pose a health risk to humans or domestic animals." – FAO/WHO (4)

"The marker gene commonly used in biotechnology, kanamycin resistance, does not confer resistance to antibiotics that are in (oral) therapeutic use. Furthermore, bacterial strains resistant to the antibiotics in questions are common in the environment and in the human intestines, and large numbers of naturally resistant bacteria are acquired when ingesting fresh foods…In the case of antibiotic resistance, there is good reason to think that GM strains pose much less of a threat than naturally occurring resistant bacterial strains, because the former represent old, narrow-spectrum and less mobilizable resistance genes not involved in the present problems in hospitals." – OECD (5)

"For most of the antibiotic resistance genes currently present in GM foods, the overall threat to the therapeutic use of antibiotics in humans is effectively zero…It is extremely unlikely that new genetic material will transfer from GM foods to bacteria in the human digestive tract because of the number of complex and unlikely steps that would need to take place consecutively. It is equally unlikely that new genetic material will transfer from GM foods to human cells via the digestive tract." ANZFA (7)

(1)  "Response of the Environmental Protection Agency to Petition for rulemaking and collateral relief concerning the registration and use of genetically engineered plants expressing Bacillus thuringiensis endotoxins." April 20, 2000. www.epa.gov/oppbppd1/biopesticides/news/news-greenpeace.htm

(2)  "Are Bioengineered Foods Safe?", FDA Consumer magazine, Jan.-Feb., 2000. www.fda.gov

(3)  "Genetically Modified Pest-Protected Plants: Science and Regulation," NRC press release, May 2000, www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf

(4)  "Safety aspects of genetically modified foods of plant origin," Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation, May 29-June2, 2000.

(5)  "Report of the task force for the safety of novel foods and feeds," OECD, May 17, 2000

(6)  "Transgenic plants and world agriculture," report of seven science academies, July 2000. www.royalsoc.ac.uk

(7)  "GM Foods and the Consumer," Australia New Zealand Food Authority, June 2000 http://www.anzfa.gov.au/Documents/pub02_00.pdf

(8)  Statement of the American Society for Microbiology on Genetically Modified Organisms, July 2000

(9)  "GM Food Safety: Facts, Uncertainties and Assessment", OECD Edinburgh Conference on Genetically Modified Foods, Feb. 28- March 1, 200

(10) "Overview of Food Safety Systems and Activities," OECD Ad Hoc Group on Food Safety, May 4, 2000.