🚀 go-pugleaf

NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name 
above.  Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify 
the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail.



 American Medical Association Adopts Pro-Biotech Principles
AgWeb News
12/20/2000
American Medical Association Adopts Pro-Biotech Principles
by Julianne Johnston

In a report issued to the American Medical Association
(AMA) this week, the group's Council on Scientific
Affairs said there is no "scientific justification for
special labeling of genetically modified foods, as a
class, and voluntary labeling is without value unless it
is accompanied by focused consumer education." The
council said the government, industry, and the
scientific and medical communities have a
"responsibility" to educate the public and improve the
availability of unbiased information on genetically
modified crops and research activities.
As a result of the report, the AMA adopted the
following seven principles - as a directive - at the
2000 Interim AMA Meeting:
The AMA recognizes the continuing validity of the
three major conclusions contained in the 1987 National
Academy of Sciences white paper "Introduction of
Recombinant DNA-Engineered Organisms into the
Environment."

Federal regulatory oversight of agricultural
biotechnology should continue to be science-based and
guided by the characteristics of the plant, its
intended use, and the environment into which it is to
be introduced, not by the method used to produce it,
in order to facilitate comprehensive, efficient
regulatory review of new genetically modified crops
and foods.

The AMA believes that as of December 2000, there is no
scientific justification for special labeling of
genetically modified foods, as a class, and that
voluntary labeling is without value unless it is
accompanied by focused consumer education.

The AMA supports efforts for the systematic safety
assessment of genetically modified foods and
encourage: (a) development and validation of
additional techniques for the detection and/or
assessment of unintended effects; (b) continued use of
methods to detect substantive changes in nutrient or
toxicant levels in genetically modified foods as part
of a substantial equivalence evaluation; (c)
development and use of alternative transformation
technologies to avoid utilization of antibiotic
resistance markers that code for clinically relevant
antibiotics, where feasible; and (d) that priority
should be given to basic research in food
allergenicity to support the development of improved
methods for identifying potential allergens.

The AMA supports continued research into the potential
consequences to the environment of genetically
modified crops including the: (a) assessment of the
impacts of pest-protected crops on nontarget organisms
compared to impacts of standard agricultural methods,
through rigorous field evaluations; (b) assessment of
gene flow and its potential consequences including key
factors that regulate weed populations; rates at which
pest resistance genes from the crop would be likely to
spread among weed and wild populations; and the impact
of novel resistance traits on weed abundance; (c)
implementation of resistance management practices and
continued monitoring of their effectiveness; and (d)
development of monitoring programs to assess
ecological impacts of pest-protected crops that may
not be apparent from the results of field tests.

The AMA recognizes the many potential benefits offered
by genetically modified crops and foods, not support a
moratorium on planting genetically modified crops, and
encourages ongoing research developments in food
biotechnology.

The AMA recognizes that the government, industry, and
the scientific and medical communities have a
responsibility to educate the public and improve the
availability of unbiased information on genetically
modified crops and of research activities.

                        Email this article to a friend
                        Printer-friendly version