Lect

ure

6H

ealt

hIm

licat

ion

sof

GM

foo

dsan

dC

onsu

mer

Con

cern

s

Pro

f. D

r. A

rtem

is K

araa

liD

epar

tmen

tof

Foo

dEn

gin

eeri

ng

Ista

nbu

lTec

hn

ical

Un

iver

sity

, Ist

anbu

l, Tu

rkey

kara

ali@

itu

.edu

.tr

Cons

umer

san

dG

M f

oods

The

Amst

erda

m T

reat

y, th

e ne

w le

gal f

ram

ewor

k fo

r Eur

opea

n in

tegr

atio

n, h

as e

xplic

itly

intro

duce

d th

e rig

ht to

info

rmat

ion

for t

he

cons

umer

s. E

urop

ean

cons

umer

s ha

ve

cons

iste

ntly

dem

ande

d th

at G

MO

-food

be

labe

lled

-not

sol

ely

for r

easo

ns o

f saf

ety,

but

in

orde

r to

mak

e an

info

rmed

cho

ice

Qu

alit

yD

imen

sion

s* in

Con

sum

erac

cept

ance

QD

*: P

rodu

ct-s

peci

ficch

arac

teris

tics

whi

chco

nsum

ers

belie

vein

dica

teus

eful

ness

of p

rodu

ctin

ful

fillin

gpu

rcha

sem

otiv

esCl

assi

ficat

ion

of Q

D(B

uyer

expe

ctat

ions

):1.

Hea

lthre

late

d(f

ood

safe

ty)

2.“H

edon

ic”:

sen

sory

plea

sure

-tas

te, a

rom

a,te

xtur

e3.

Conv

enie

nce

rela

ted

4.Pr

oces

sre

late

d: s

ocia

l, et

hica

land

/or

envi

ronm

enta

lco

ncer

ns:

“org

anic

”,”G

M, a

nim

alw

elfa

reet

c.

Food

Safe

tySa

fety

is th

e m

ost i

mpo

rtant

atri

bute

of fo

ods.

O

ther

ver

y im

porta

nt c

onsi

dera

tions

suc

h as

qu

ality

, val

ue fo

r mon

ey,

tast

e et

c.co

me

seco

nd.

Whe

n th

e co

nsum

er c

hoos

es a

pr

oduc

t fro

m th

e su

perm

arke

t she

lves

,his

first

an

d ov

er-ri

ding

pre

sum

ptio

n is

that

it s

houl

d be

saf

e.

Toas

sure

food

safe

ty, c

onsu

mer

sex

pect

*con

fiden

cein

pro

duce

rand

*p

redi

ctib

ility

of p

rodu

ct

Type

sof

QD

Inf

orm

atio

nav

aila

ble

1. S

earc

h: a

vaila

ble

at p

urch

ase

i.e. P

acka

geun

iform

ityan

din

tegr

ity2.

Exp

erie

nce:

aft

erco

nsum

ptio

n:i.e

. tas

te3.

Cre

denc

e: t

rust

judg

emen

tof

oth

ers

thro

ugh

cred

ible

com

mun

icat

ion

Mar

ketin

gfo

odpr

oduc

tsba

sed

on c

rede

nce

is in

here

ntly

prob

lem

mat

ican

dre

quire

“cre

dibi

lity-

enha

ncin

gde

vice

s” li

ke“p

ersu

asiv

eco

mm

unic

atio

n”.

Det

erm

inan

tsof

Per

suas

ive

Com

mu

nic

atio

n

1. C

redi

bilit

yof

Sou

rce:

adv

ertis

emen

tby

prod

ucer

is a

lway

sof

low

ercr

eden

ceth

anth

atof

an

inde

pend

ent

third

part

yve

rific

atio

nof

info

rmat

ion.

2. R

ecei

vers

’ mot

ivat

ion

and

abili

tyto

proc

ess

info

rmat

ion(

i.e. o

meg

afa

tty

acid

she

alth

clai

ms)

.“E

cono

mic

sof

Inf

orm

atio

nTh

eror

y” :

Onc

eyo

ube

lieve

info

rmat

ion

is c

redi

ble

, it

beco

mes

mor

eus

eful

and

in h

ighe

rde

man

d.

Cred

ible

Com

mun

icat

ion

on G

M f

oods

GM

foo

dsbe

arch

arac

teris

tics

whi

chco

nsum

ers

cann

otse

arch

orex

perie

nce

them

selv

esbu

t ha

veto

rely

on “

cred

ence

dim

ensi

on”

Cred

ible

com

mun

icat

ion

has

toin

clud

e:

1.W

heth

erpr

oduc

tis

or

is n

ot G

M.

2. W

heth

erG

M

tech

nolo

gyis

“ba

d”

or“n

ot b

ad.”

Cons

umer

s’ G

M P

erce

ptio

nsan

dCo

ncer

ns(1

)

Soci

al

acce

ptan

ceof

bi

otec

hnol

ogy*

(*

Use

d fo

r m

edic

al,

phar

mac

eutic

al,

agric

ultu

ral,

anim

al h

usba

ndry

an

d fo

od

purp

oses

)

in th

eEU

199

8 su

rvey

:So

urce

: Pog

na,

2000

28

67

47

AUT

(min

)

ITA

(max

)

EU a

vg

Perc

enta

ges

in f

avou

r

Exam

ple

Cons

umer

Stud

ies:

1. Y

oghu

rtst

udy

Aim

: To

dete

rmin

eco

nsum

erpe

rcep

tions

of y

oghu

rtpr

oduc

edw

ithG

M c

ultu

reIm

prov

edQ

ual

ity

Trai

ts:

low

-fat

, bet

ter

tast

ean

dbe

tter

text

ure

N=

50 c

onsu

mer

s/c

ount

ry,in

199

7fr

omG

erm

any,

Den

mar

k, I

taly

and

UK

Con

clu

sion

: A

host

of n

egat

ive

asso

ciat

ions

with

GM

(

“unf

amili

ar”,

“m

oral

lyw

rong

”, “

unne

cess

ary”

, “un

who

leso

me

and

artif

icia

l”, ”

harm

sna

ture

”, ”

cann

ottr

ust”

) o

vers

hado

wed

purc

hase

mot

ives

, and

inhi

bite

dpe

rcep

tions

of b

enef

its.

2. C

hees

eSt

udy

Four

chee

sesa

mpl

esw

ithG

M a

ndon

eco

nven

tiona

lpr

oduc

tw

ere

com

pare

dfo

rco

nsum

erpe

rcep

tions

. (1

999)

Tota

lnum

ber

of c

onsu

mer

s= 2

85(D

enm

ark,

Nor

way

, Sw

eden

, Fin

land

)C

oncl

usi

on:

Cons

umer

sov

erw

helm

ingl

ypr

efer

red

conv

entio

nalp

rodu

ctev

enth

ough

bene

fits

of G

M

prod

ucts

wer

ecl

early

ackn

owle

dged

(“go

odta

ste”

).

Lack

of t

rust

(“un

natu

ral”

, “le

sshe

alth

y”,

”unc

erta

inty

”, “

may

harm

imm

une

syst

em”)

in G

M

tech

nolo

gyov

er-s

hado

wed

the

perc

eive

dbe

nefit

s.

Per

cen

tage

of

cor

rect

an

swer

s to

th

e qu

esti

on:

"Doe

s ea

tin

g tr

ansg

enic

fr

uit

de

term

ine

a ch

ang

e in

yo

ur

own

ge

ne

pool

?“(N

O!)

So

urce

: H

oban

T., N

atbi

o19

97

75

62 62 62

58

55

54

52

40

38

34

29

NET

CAN US

A

SW

E

ITA UK FIN

FRA

SPA

GER IR

E

AUT

Con

sum

ers’

GM

Per

cept

ions

and

Con

cern

s(2)

Mea

surin

gTh

eirK

now

ledg

e

Cons

umer

’sG

M P

erce

ptio

nsan

dCo

ncer

ns(3

)M

easu

ring

Cred

ibili

ties*

*Cre

dibi

lity:

Do

they

say

th

e tr

uth

whe

n t

alki

ng

abou

t fo

od q

ual

ity

and

safe

ty?

3%

7%

11%

11%12

%13%14

%

21%22

%

33%

36%

2%

3%

15%

6%

5%

14%

8%

7%

8%

28%

35%

Pol

itica

l par

ties

Gov

ernm

enta

l age

ncie

s

Eur

opea

n C

omm

issi

on

Sup

erm

arke

ts

Pub

lic A

utho

ritie

s

prod

ucer

s

Trad

e Un

ions

Pre

ss

Med

ia (r

adio

/TV

)

Teac

hers

Sci

entis

ts

Italy

EU

Opp

osit

ion

from

th

e pu

blic

agai

nst

ge

net

ic

engi

nee

rin

g be

ing

prom

inen

tly

disp

laye

d by

gr

affi

ti o

n t

he

side

of

an a

rt

galle

ry in

New

Zea

lan

d

The

Sci

enti

st

15

[11

]:1

3, M

ay.

28

, 20

01

Mem

bers

of th

eEarthLiberationFront

clai

med

resp

onsi

bilit

yfo

ra

fire

at M

ichi

gan

Stat

eU

nive

rsity

that

dest

roye

da

build

ing

bein

gus

edfo

rw

ork

rela

ted

toag

ricu

ltura

lbi

otec

hnol

ogy.

"Com

pani

esar

eno

t goi

ngto

liste

n to

mor

als,"

saidEarth

LiberationFrontspokespersonCraigRosebraugh

. "If

you

caus

eth

emen

ough

econ

omic

dam

age

orec

onom

icsa

bota

geto

thei

rin

dust

ry, h

opef

ully

they

will

see

that

it is

in

thei

rbe

stin

tere

stto

stop

thei

run

just

acts

."

Act

ivis

tsan

dlo

bby

grou

ps

Fam

ous

Ant

ibio

tech

Qu

otat

ion

sfr

omth

eM

edia

:

1. P

olit

ical

acti

vist

Jer

emy

Rif

kin

has

ch

arac

teri

zed

biot

ech

nol

ogy

“as

thre

aten

ing

a f

orm

of

ann

ihila

tion

eve

ry b

it a

s de

adly

as

nu

clea

r h

oloc

aust

“.

2.G

reen

pea

ce d

eman

ds "

com

plet

e el

imin

atio

n o

f bi

otec

h p

rodu

cts

from

th

e fo

od s

up

ply

and

the

envi

ron

men

t."

Gre

enpe

ace

Exec

uti

ve D

irec

tor

Pet

er M

elch

ett

qu

oted

: "S

cien

tist

s ca

n n

o m

ore

guar

ante

e th

e sa

fety

of

gen

etic

ally

en

gin

eere

d fo

ods

than

th

ey c

ould

pre

dict

the

BS

E cr

isis

".

3. P

rin

ce C

har

les

: “.

..ge

net

ic e

ngi

nee

rin

g t

akes

man

kin

d in

to

real

ms

that

bel

ong

to

God

an

d G

od a

lon

e”..

•How

are

GM

food

sreg

ulat

edan

dw

hati

s the

gove

rnm

ent's

role

in

this

proc

ess?

•Gov

ernm

ents

arou

ndth

ew

orld

esta

blis

ha

regu

lato

rypr

oces

sto

mon

itort

heef

fect

sof a

ndap

prov

ene

wva

rietie

sof G

M p

lant

s. Y

et d

epen

ding

on th

epo

litic

al, s

ocia

land

econ

omic

clim

ate

with

ina

regi

onor

coun

try, d

iffer

entg

over

nmen

tsar

ere

spon

ding

in d

iffer

entw

ays.

•In

Japa

n, th

eM

inis

tryof

Hea

lthan

dW

elfa

rem

ade

the

test

ing

of G

M

food

sbec

ome

man

dato

ryas

of A

pril

2001

. B

efor

e, t

estin

gof

GM

fo

odsw

asvo

lunt

ary.

Japa

nese

supe

rmar

kets

are

offe

ring

both

GM

fo

odsa

ndun

mod

ified

food

s; c

usto

mer

sare

begi

nnin

gto

show

a st

rong

erpr

efer

ence

foru

nmod

ified

frui

tsan

dve

geta

bles

.

•Ind

ia's

gove

rnm

enth

as n

ot y

et a

noun

ced

a na

tiona

lpol

icy

on G

M

food

sbec

ause

no G

M c

rops

are

grow

nin

Indi

aan

dno

GM

food

prod

ucts

are

com

mer

cial

lyav

aila

ble

in su

perm

arke

tsye

t . In

dia

is,

how

ever

, ver

ysu

ppor

tive

of tr

ansg

enic

plan

t res

earc

h. It

is h

ighl

ylik

ely

that

Indi

aw

illde

cide

that

the

bene

fitso

f GM

food

sout

wei

ghth

eris

ksbe

caus

eIn

dian

agric

ultu

rew

illne

edto

adop

tdra

stic

new

mea

sure

sto

coun

tera

ctth

eco

untry

'sen

dem

icpo

verty

and

feed

itsex

plod

ing

popu

latio

n.

•Som

est

ates

in B

razi

lhav

eba

nned

GM

cro

psen

tirel

y,

and

the

Bra

zilia

nIn

stitu

tefo

rthe

Def

ense

of C

onsu

mer

s, in

col

labo

ratio

nw

ithG

reen

peac

e, h

as fi

led

suit

topr

even

tthe

impo

rtatio

nof

GM

cro

ps.

•Mos

tBra

zilia

nfa

rmer

s, ho

wev

er, h

ave

reso

rted

tosm

uggl

ing

GM

soyb

ean

seed

sint

oth

eco

untry

beca

use

they

fear

econ

omic

harm

ifth

eyar

eun

able

toco

mpe

tein

th

egl

obal

mar

ketp

lace

with

othe

rgra

in-e

xpor

ting

coun

tries

.

•Eur

ope

is w

here

anti-

GM

food

prot

esto

rsha

vebe

enes

peci

ally

activ

e.

Inth

ela

stfe

wye

arsE

urop

eha

s exp

erie

nced

two

maj

orfo

odss

care

s:

bovi

nesp

ongi

form

ence

phal

opat

hy(m

adco

wdi

seas

e) in

Gre

atB

ritai

nan

ddi

oxin

-tain

ted

food

sorig

inat

ing

from

Bel

gium

. The

sefo

odsc

ares

have

unde

rmin

edco

nsum

erco

nfid

ence

abou

tthe

Euro

pean

food

supp

ly, a

ndci

tizen

sare

disi

nclin

edto

trust

gove

rnm

enti

nfor

mat

ion

abou

tGM

food

s. •I

nre

spon

seto

the

publ

icou

tcry

, Eur

ope

now

requ

iresm

anda

tory

food

labe

ling

of G

M fo

odsi

n st

ores

, and

the

Euro

pean

Com

mis

sion

(EC

) has

est

ablis

hed

a 1%

thre

shol

dfo

rcon

tam

inat

ion

of u

nmod

ified

food

swith

GM

food

prod

ucts

.

Inth

eU

nite

dSt

ates

, in

the

regu

lato

rypr

oces

s, th

ere

are

thre

edi

ffer

entg

over

nmen

tage

ncie

stha

thav

eju

risdi

ctio

nov

erG

M fo

ods:

•T

heEP

A e

valu

ates

GM

pla

ntsf

oren

viro

nmen

tals

afet

y,•T

heU

SDA

eva

luat

esw

heth

erth

epl

anti

s saf

eto

grow

, •T

heFD

A e

valu

ates

whe

ther

the

plan

tis s

afe

toea

t.

The

EPA

is re

spon

sibl

efo

rreg

ulat

ing

subs

tanc

essu

chas

pes

ticid

esor

toxi

nsth

atm

ayca

use

harm

toth

een

viro

nmen

t. G

M c

rops

such

as B

.t.

pest

icid

e-la

ced

corn

orhe

rbic

ide-

tole

rant

crop

s[bu

t not

food

sm

odifi

edfo

rthe

irnu

tritio

nalv

alue

]fal

lund

erth

epu

rvie

wof

the

EPA

.

•The

USD

A is

resp

onsi

ble

forG

M c

rops

that

do n

ot fa

llun

dert

heum

brel

laof

the

EPA

such

as d

roug

ht-to

lera

ntor

dise

ase-

tole

rant

crop

s, cr

opsg

row

nfo

rani

mal

feed

s, or

who

lefr

uits

, veg

etab

lesa

ndgr

ains

forh

uman

cons

umpt

ion.

•The

FDA

his

toric

ally

has b

een

conc

erne

dw

ithph

arm

aceu

tical

s, co

smet

icsa

ndfo

odpr

oduc

tsan

dad

ditiv

es, n

ot w

hole

food

s. U

nder

curr

entg

uide

lines

, a g

enet

ical

ly-m

odifi

edea

rof c

orn

sold

at a

pr

oduc

est

and

is n

ot re

gula

ted

byth

eFD

A b

ecau

seit

is a

who

lefo

od;

but a

box

of c

ornf

lake

sis r

egul

ated

beca

use

it is

a fo

odpr

oduc

t. Th

eFD

A's

stan

ceis

that

GM

food

sare

subs

tant

ially

equi

vale

ntto

unm

odifi

ed, "

natu

ral"

food

s, an

dth

eref

ore

shou

ldno

t be

subj

ectt

ore

gula

tion.

•How

are

GM

food

slab

eled

?•L

abel

ing

of G

M fo

odsa

ndfo

odpr

oduc

tsis

an

impo

rtant

issu

e. O

n th

ew

hole

, agr

ibus

ines

sind

ustri

esbe

lieve

that

labe

ling

shou

ldbe

vol

unta

ryan

din

fluen

ced

byth

ede

man

dsof

the

free

mar

ket.

•Con

sum

erin

tere

stgr

oups

, on

the

othe

rhan

d, a

rede

man

ding

man

dato

ryla

belin

g. P

eopl

eha

veth

erig

htto

know

wha

tthe

yar

eea

ting,

arg

ueth

ein

tere

stgr

oups

, and

hist

oric

ally

the

food

indu

stry

has p

rove

nits

elft

obe

un

relia

ble

at se

lf-co

mpl

ianc

ew

ithex

istin

gsa

fety

regu

latio

ns.

•The

rear

em

any

ques

tions

that

mus

tbe

answ

ered

ifla

belin

gof

G

M fo

odsb

ecom

esm

anda

tory

.

•Firs

t, ar

eco

nsum

ersw

illin

gto

abso

rbth

eco

stof

such

an

initi

ativ

e? If

the

food

prod

uctio

nin

dust

ryis

requ

ired

tola

belG

M

food

s, fa

ctor

iesw

illne

edto

cons

truct

two

sepa

rate

proc

essi

ngst

ream

sand

mon

itort

hepr

oduc

tion

lines

acco

rdin

gly.

Far

mer

sm

ustb

e ab

leto

keep

GM

cro

psan

dno

n-G

M c

rops

from

mix

ing

durin

gpl

antin

g, h

arve

stin

gan

dsh

ippi

ng. O

f cou

rse

the

indu

stry

will

pass

alon

gth

ese

addi

tiona

lcos

tsto

cons

umer

sin

the

form

of

high

erpr

ices

.

•Sec

ondl

y, w

hata

reth

eac

cept

able

limits

of G

M c

onta

min

atio

nin

no

n-G

M p

rodu

cts?

The

EC h

as d

eter

min

edth

at1%

is a

n ac

cept

able

limit

of c

ross

-con

tam

inat

ion,

yet

man

yco

nsum

erin

tere

stgr

oups

argu

eth

aton

ly0%

is a

ccep

tabl

e.

•Som

eco

mpa

nies

such

as G

erbe

rbab

yfo

odsa

ndFr

ito-L

ayha

vepl

edge

dto

avoi

dus

eof

GM

food

sin

any

of th

eirp

rodu

cts.

But

who

is

goin

gto

mon

itort

hese

com

pani

esfo

rcom

plia

nce

and

wha

tis t

hepe

nalty

ifth

eyfa

il? O

nce

agai

n, th

eFD

A d

oesn

ot h

ave

the

reso

urce

sto

carr

you

ttes

ting

toen

sure

com

plia

nce.

•Thi

rdly

, wha

tis t

hele

velo

f det

ecta

bilit

yof

GM

food

cros

s-co

ntam

inat

ion?

Sci

entis

tsag

ree

that

curr

entt

echn

olog

yis

una

ble

tode

tect

min

ute

quan

titie

sof c

onta

min

atio

n, so

ensu

ring

0%

cont

amin

atio

nus

ing

exis

ting

met

hodo

logi

esis

not

gua

rant

eed.

A 1

%

thre

shol

dm

ayal

read

ybe

bel

owcu

rren

tlev

elso

f det

ecta

bilit

y.

•Fin

ally

, who

is to

be re

spon

sibl

efo

redu

catin

gth

epu

blic

abou

tGM

fo

odla

bels

and

how

cost

lyw

illth

ated

ucat

ion

be?

Food

labe

lsm

ustb

e de

sign

edto

clea

rlyco

nvey

accu

rate

info

rmat

ion

abou

tthe

prod

ucti

n si

mpl

ela

ngua

geth

atev

eryo

neca

n un

ders

tand

. Thi

smay

be th

egr

eate

stch

alle

nge

face

dbe

a n

ewfo

odla

belin

gpo

licy:

how

toed

ucat

ean

din

form

the

publ

icw

ithou

tdam

agin

gth

epu

blic

trust

and

caus

ing

alar

m o

rfe

arof

GM

food

prod

ucts

.

UK

Con

side

rsD

NA

'Bar

-Cod

ing'

toIn

crea

seG

MO

Tra

ceab

ility

In20

00, a

n in

tern

atio

nalt

rade

agre

emen

tfor

labe

ling

GM

food

swas

esta

blis

hed.

Mor

eth

an13

0 co

untri

es, i

nclu

ding

the

US,

the

wor

ld's

larg

estp

rodu

cero

f GM

food

s, si

gned

the

agre

emen

t. Th

epo

licy

stat

esth

atex

porte

rsm

ustb

e re

quire

dto

labe

lall

GM

food

sand

that

impo

rting

coun

tries

have

the

right

toju

dge

fort

hem

selv

esth

epo

tent

ialr

isks

and

reje

ctG

M fo

ods,

ifth

eyso

choo

se. T

hisn

ewag

reem

entm

aysp

urth

eU

.S. g

over

nmen

tto

reso

lve

the

dom

estic

food

labe

ling

dile

mm

a m

ore

rapi

dly.

The

Euro

pean

Com

mis

sion

ado

pted

late

ly

THE

WH

ITE

PAPE

R

ON

FO

OD

SAF

ETY,

whi

ch i

s an

am

bitio

us a

ctio

n pl

an t

o tra

nsfo

rm to

day'

s EU

food

pol

icy.

The

actio

ns p

lann

ed a

re b

ased

on

a c

ompr

ehen

sive

, in

tegr

ated

app

roac

h th

roug

hout

the

foo

d ch

ain

-in

othe

r wor

ds fr

om "

farm

to fo

rk"

desi

gned

to m

ake

EU-

legi

slat

ion

mor

e co

here

nt,u

nder

stan

dabl

e an

d fle

xibl

e. T

here

are

mor

e th

an 8

0 se

para

te a

ctio

ns p

ropo

sed

whi

chin

clud

e al

sopr

opos

als

on G

MO

s.

The

Whi

te P

aper

pro

vide

s th

at s

cien

tific

ass

essm

ent a

nd a

dvic

e m

ust b

e ba

sed

on in

depe

nden

ce, e

xcel

lenc

e an

d tra

nspa

renc

y.

Publ

ic c

onfid

ence

can

onl

y be

mai

ntai

ned

in a

sys

tem

whe

re

scie

ntifi

cris

k as

sess

men

tsar

e ca

rried

out

by

emin

ent s

cien

tists

an

d in

depe

nden

tly o

f ind

ustri

al a

nd p

oliti

cal i

nter

ests

. Sci

entif

ic

advi

ce m

ust b

e op

en to

rigo

rous

pub

lic s

crut

iny.

The

Com

mis

sion

has

pro

pose

d th

e es

tabl

ishm

ent o

f an

inde

pend

ent

Euro

pean

Foo

d Au

thor

ityw

ith p

artic

ular

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

for r

isk

asse

ssm

ent a

nd ri

sk c

omm

unic

atio

n to

con

sum

ers

to p

rovi

de a

dvic

e an

d gu

idan

ce.

Unl

ike

the

FDA

in U

SA,

it w

ill n

ot h

ave

regu

lato

ry p

ower

s. T

hese

are

en

trus

ted

to th

e C

omm

issi

on, t

he E

urop

ean

Parli

amen

t and

the

Cou

ncil

of

Min

iste

rs.

A cl

ear d

istin

ctio

n is

mad

e be

twee

n, o

n th

e on

e ha

nd, “

risk-

asse

ssm

ent”

whi

ch h

as to

be

base

d on

sci

entif

ic e

xcel

lenc

e an

d in

depe

nden

ce a

nd, o

n th

e ot

her h

and,

risk

-man

agem

ent w

hich

is th

e re

spon

sibi

lity

of d

ecis

ion-

mak

ers,

who

are

pol

itica

lly a

ccou

ntab

le to

the

citiz

ens

Ris

k M

anag

emen

tCy

cle

QU

ANTI

TATI

VE R

ISK

ASSE

SSM

ENT

Prop

osed

chan

ges

toEU

Dire

ctiv

e90

/220

/EEC

• Se

ttin

gcl

ear

tim

e lim

its

duri

ng

con

side

rati

onof

mar

keti

ng

rele

ase

appl

icat

ion

sw

ith

the

aim

of g

ivin

ga

deci

sion

con

cern

ing

an a

pplic

atio

nw

ith

inon

eye

ar.

• C

lari

fica

tion

of t

he

risk

ass

essm

ent

and

har

mon

isat

ion

acro

ssm

embe

rst

ates

toin

clu

deas

sess

men

tof

dir

ect,

indi

rect

, im

med

iate

and

dela

yed

risk

or

impa

ct.

• M

onit

orin

gan

dti

me

limit

atio

ns

for

mar

keti

ng

con

sent

s, s

uch

that

mon

itor

ing

will

occu

rpo

st-r

elea

sefo

rco

mm

erci

alpu

rpos

es. I

nad

diti

onm

arke

tin

gco

nse

nts

will

hav

ea

fin

ite

life

of t

en y

ears

afte

rw

hic

hth

eym

ust

be r

evie

wed

.

• I

mpr

ovin

gth

etr

ansp

aren

cyof

app

licat

ion

sfo

rco

nse

nt

tore

leas

efo

rm

arke

tin

g, a

llow

ing

the

publ

icto

see

the

con

ten

tof

su

chap

plic

atio

ns.

• A

ppoi

ntm

ent

of a

com

mit

tee

tode

alsp

ecif

ical

lyw

ith

the

ques

tion

of e

thic

alis

sues

aris

ing

from

the

appl

icat

ion

of b

iote

chn

olog

y.

CO

NC

LUD

ING

REM

ARK

S:

•Gen

etic

ally

-mod

ifie

dfo

ods

mig

ht

hav

eth

ep

oten

tial

toso

lve

man

yof

th

ew

orld

'sh

un

ger

and

mal

nu

trit

ion

prob

lem

s, a

nd

toh

elp

prot

ect

and

pres

erve

the

envi

ron

men

tby

incr

easi

ng

yiel

dan

dre

duci

ng

relia

nce

upo

nch

emic

alpe

stic

ides

and

her

bici

des.

•Yet

th

ere

are

man

ych

alle

ng

esah

ead

for

gove

rnm

ents

, es

peci

ally

in t

he

area

sof

saf

ety

test

ing,

reg

ula

tion

, in

tern

atio

nal

polic

yan

dfo

odla

bel

ing.

•Man

ype

ople

feel

that

gen

etic

engi

nee

rin

gis

th

ein

evit

able

wav

eof

th

efu

ture

and

that

we

can

not

affo

rdto

ign

ore

a te

chno

logy

that

prom

ises

such

pot

enti

albe

nef

its.

How

ever

, we

mu

stpr

ocee

dw

ith

cau

tion

toav

oid

cau

sin

gu

nin

ten

ded

har

mto

hu

man

hea

lth

and

the

envi

ron

men

tas

a r

esu

ltof

sh

eer

enth

usi

asm

for

this

pow

erfu

ltec

hn

olog

y.

The

idea

l reg

ula

tory

sys

tem

shou

ld b

e an

ope

n, t

ran

spar

ent

and

incl

usi

ve o

ne

whe

re t

he

fact

ual

ris

ks a

re c

onti

nu

ally

co

mm

un

icat

edto

cons

um

ers

and

effi

cien

tly

man

aged

byre

spon

sibl

eau

thor

itie

s.

The

syst

em s

hou

ld n

ot n

eces

sari

ly b

e on

e pr

omis

ing

th

e pu

blic

abs

olu

te “

zero

”ri

sk, b

ut

shou

ld h

ave

“pu

blic

hea

lth

pr

otec

tion

”as

its

para

mou

nt

obje

ctiv

e, a

nd b

e ab

le t

o re

act

quic

kly

in c

ases

of

trou

ble.

Nat

iona

l reg

ula

tion

s sh

ould

als

o be

con

sist

ent

wit

h t

he

con

sen

sus

inte

rnat

iona

l gu

idel

ines

an

d st

anda

rds

esta

blis

hed

by

rele

van

t in

tern

atio

nal s

tan

dard

set

tin

g bo

dies

an

d sh

ould

acc

omm

odat

e th

e co

un

try'

s ob

ligat

ion

s u

nde

r in

tern

atio

nal

tra

de

agre

emen

ts.

Ris

k an

d u

ncer

tain

ty w

ill a

lway

s re

mai

n a

s tw

o m

ajor

det

erm

inan

ts o

f G

M t

echn

olog

ies

and

prod

ucts

, but

not

an

y m

ore

or a

ny

less

si

gnif

ican

t th

an t

hos

e o

f m

any

oth

er a

spec

ts

of m

oder

n li

fe, s

ince

nei

ther

ris

k n

or

unc

erta

inty

in o

ther

foo

d pr

oces

sin

g un

it

oper

atio

ns,

or

in in

nov

atio

ns

in o

ther

te

chn

olog

ical

fie

lds,

sh

ould

be

expe

cted

to

ever

rea

ch

abso

lute

zer

o.