FLORIDA SCIENTIST PROPOSES PHASED DEREGULATION OF BIOTECH CROPS
September 3, 2003
Southeast Farm Press
Chuck Woods
Via AgBioView at www.agbioworld.org
University of Florida graduate research professor emeritus Indra Vasil, with
UF's Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, was cited as saying that
opposition to biotech crops and foods is based on politics and ideology
rather than science, and that the regulatory requirements for plant
biotechnology should be lifted, adding, "The biotechnology community - which
includes academia, industry and the regulatory agencies - has been patient
and on the defensive for too long. It is time now to shift the debate from
unnecessary regulation to deregulation. After growing these crops for many
years on more than 400 million acres of land in various countries and after
more than a billion people using biotech foods, there is not a single
instance where they have been shown to cause illness in humans or animals or
any environmental damage."
In a commentary in the August issue of the journal Nature Biotechnology,
Vasil wrote that the "enviable and unblemished record" of biotech crops and
their products is the strongest evidence for their safety and wholesomeness,
and he calls for an end to government control over them.
"Two decades ago, the United States pioneered the rules and regulations for
the development, testing and use of biotech plants and their products. Now
it's time for the U.S. to assert its leadership once again by relaxing and
gradually eliminating the regulatory oversight on biotech crops, except in
those rare instances where there is a likelihood of risk to human health and
the environment," he said.
The story goes on to further quote Vasil as saying, "The consumer, the
farmer and the biotechnology industry have all been ill-served - indeed held
hostage - by the sustained campaign of misinformation and unsubstantiated
claims of dangers to public health and the environment. The
anti-biotechnology movement is clearly based on political and ideological
opposition to biotechnology and the globalization rather than any real
scientific concerns."
Vasil was further cited as saying the present level of regulatory oversight
is now unnecessary because it needlessly increases the cost of biotech
products and unduly delays their introduction into the international
agricultural system, adding, "Regulatory decisions should be based on
science rather than emotions and perceived risks"A beginning should be made
by removing all restrictions on the cultivation and use of biotech crops
that have fulfilled regulatory requirements and have been cultivated or used
for five years without any ill effects on humans or the environment. These
include herbicide-resistant soybean and canola plants, insect-resistant
maize and cotton, and virus-resistant squash and papaya.
New biotech crops with similar genes should not be required to meet the
regulatory requirements for more than two years unless thee are clear signs
of risks, he said.