FDA's June 18 Advertisement Uses the Name of Science to Serve as Advertising: Our Foundation's June 20 Statement
Link to the full statement (Homemakers United Foundation website)
http://www.huf.org.tw/essay/content/2468
"Using the Name of Science to Serve as Advertising" - Our Foundation's Statement on the FDA's June 18 Advertisement
2014.06.20
Source: Homemakers United Foundation
On June 18, the Food and Drug Administration published in the United Daily News<舌尖上的科学：基改食品致癌？证据不足！>a half-page advertisement, using the promotion of food safety science as its banner to persuade the people of Taiwan to accept genetically modified foods. This act is tantamount to a blow to the "Act Governing Food Safety and Sanitation," which only brought genetically modified crops under regulation earlier this year.
Looking at the article as a whole, it simply relies on the one-sided arguments of three individuals (a scientist, a food industry representative, and the FDA Director-General) to claim that genetically modified crops are perfectly safe, without presenting any concrete scientific evidence from either side of the debate for or against GM technology. Recalling the April news that senior executives from Monsanto, the multinational GM corporate giant, visited Taiwan and claimed they would offer suggestions to the Ministry of Health and Welfare regarding the implementation rules of Taiwan's "Act Governing Food Safety and Sanitation" and GM labeling, when compared with this advertisement disguised as new scientific knowledge, the FDA's motive and purpose in shielding GM foods are abundantly clear.
The Homemakers United Foundation has long advocated for a GMO-free movement in Taiwan and has continuously participated in government meetings on establishing GM food labeling regulations. Regarding this FDA advertisement that, in the name of scientific knowledge, takes things out of context, holds a biased position, and wastes taxpayers' money to publish so-called "new scientific knowledge," we issue the following statement:
1. We call on the FDA to faithfully present scientific evidence and not one-sidedly mislead the public's understanding of GM crops.
The article begins by citing the case of French professor Gilles-Eric Séralini, whose animal experiment was retracted from a journal on the grounds of "insufficient number of animal subjects" and "the rat strain used in the experiment being a tumor-prone strain," to illustrate that the inference that "GM foods cause cancer" is alarmist. But what the article does not say is that Monsanto also used the same rat strain to conduct its GM food safety experiments, and refused to disclose its experimental methods and data. If GM foods are truly so safe, why not dare to publish?
Furthermore, genetic engineering involves inserting specific genes through vectors such as viruses or bacteria, breaking the biological rule that "different species cannot exchange DNA," and is a completely different concept and technology from traditional breeding, which cultivates target crops between organisms of the same species. This is basic biology that ordinary people can understand. Genetic engineering and traditional breeding are absolutely not "not much different" as the FDA claims.
2. The absence of direct evidence showing harm to the human body from GM foods does not mean we should eat GM foods.
GM crops only began commercial cultivation in 1996. It is generally believed that what effects they will have on the human body are estimated to gradually emerge only after a generation (about 30 years). It is not the case that just because there is no immediate danger or death case after consumption, one can claim that GM foods are safe.
Take the recently much-discussed copper chlorophyllin as an example: eating it will not cause immediate illness or death, so should we therefore eat it? The government really should not continue to deceive the public with such absurd logic.
3. Implement the traceability system of the Food Safety Act, protect the public's right to know, and do not take a backward step on GM labeling.
Regarding FDA Director-General Yeh Ming-kung's statement that "there are really too many GM foods; if every product had to be labeled, it would not only be meaningless but also involve cost considerations; in the future, it will be gradually amended so that only non-genetically-modified foods need to be labeled," our Foundation feels extremely disappointed and perplexed. As the head of the competent authority responsible for safeguarding the public's food safety, does this statement mean advocating that GM foods should no longer be labeled from now on?
In addition, Articles 22, 24, and 25 of the Act stipulate that foods, food additives, and bulk foods shall all clearly indicate whether they contain genetically modified raw materials, so as to implement the protection of the public's right to know through the GM food labeling system. Under the urging of legislative bodies and civil society groups, the FDA today (6/20) announced three draft items including "Matters to Be Observed for Labeling of Packaged Foods, Bulk Foods, and Food Additives Containing Genetically Modified Food Raw Materials." But Director-General Yeh's inappropriate statement inevitably makes one suspect whether he intends to break his word, opening a convenient door for GM crops to massively encroach on Taiwan in the future.
4. The government should prioritize protecting the people's dietary safety, rather than claiming neutrality while actually presupposing a position, which in effect shields GM foods.
As a government agency safeguarding the people's health and safety, it should not only fulfill regulations but also strictly guard against risks before they arise, actively preventing possible risks in food, rather than claiming neutrality while actually presupposing a position.
In the years our Foundation has promoted the GMO-free movement in Taiwan, many scholars from cross-disciplinary fields such as agriculture, science and technology, humanities, and social sciences have all participated in discussions. Yet in this FDA promotional article that wields public authority, wastes tax money, and deliberately ignores or conceals risk information about GM foods, the discourse of experts and scholars and their discussions on the environmental pollution caused by GM crops and the risks of human consumption have completely disappeared. We reasonably suspect that they have been maliciously silenced in order to carry out its one-sided propaganda purpose.
Internationally, debate over the safety of GM foods continues unabated and new data and evidence keep emerging. The FDA should start from actively defending the people's dietary safety, make all relevant public information at home and abroad available, and establish a transparent policy-making process with citizen participation, fully communicating with the public through various information channels, so as to live up to the public's trust and safeguard the food safety rights and interests of all consumers.
Press contact: Homemakers United Foundation, Secretary-General Lai Hsiao-fen 0937-800-597
Homemakers United Foundation, Secretary Chen Ju-wei 0931-371-696