Embrace biotechnology with an eye on potential problems. That
was the message U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman gave
the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., July 14.
“As
we encourage the development of these new food production
systems,
we cannot blindly embrace their benefits,” he said. “We
have to ensure consumer confidence and assure farmers they will
benefit.”
Five Principles/Advisory
Committee
Glickman said five principles should guide biotechnology in
the 21st century: (1) an arm’s-length regulatory process, (2)
consumer acceptance, (3) fairness to farmers, (4) corporate
citizenship
and (5) free and open trade.
Glickman set up a Secretary’s Advisory Committee on
Agricultural
Biotechnology. The group is a cross-section of 25 people from
government, academe, agriculture, agribusiness and environmental,
ethics and consumer groups. It will begin meeting in the
fall.
“The committee will provide advice on a broad range of
issues on biotechnology and on maintaining a flexible policy as
biotechnology evolves,” he said. “Public policy must
lead and not merely react. Industry and government cannot engage
in hedging or double-talking as problems develop.”
Soybean, Corn and
Pharmaceuticals
Most of today’s U.S. soybeans and a fast-rising part of the
corn crop are genetically engineered, he said. And researchers
are looking at genetically modified mosquitoes that can’t carry
malaria. But Glickman said we have only chipped the high-tech
iceberg.
“Biotechnology is already transforming medicine,”
he said. “Pharmaceuticals such as human insulin for
diabetes,
interferon and other cancer medications, antibiotics and vaccines
are all products of genetic engineering.”
U.S. scientists are also looking at processing drugs from milk
from genetically altered cows. Others are growing bananas that
may one day deliver vaccines to children in developing
countries.
USDA, FDA and EPA
Three federal agencies – The U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Food and Drug Administration and Environmental Protection Agency
– each play a role in determining the use of biotechnology
products
in the United States.
USDA tests products for risk to other plants and animals and
has already approved about 50 genetically altered plant
varieties.
FDA reviews biotechnology’s effect on food safety. EPA examines
pesticides.
To keep pace with fast-growing agricultural biotechnology,
Glickman announced two new steps “to ensure we are fully
prepared to meet the regulatory challenges.”
Outside Review of Biotech
Process
The first is to create an independent scientific review of
USDA’s biotech approval process. The idea is to make sure USDA
scientists have the best information and tools to keep regulatory
capabilities evolving at the same pace as new technology.
To address complex issues like pharmaceutical-producing plants
or genetically modified livestock will require consulting
experts,
many of whom are outside USDA.
Farm biotech firms have two main concerns, said Paul
Guillebeau,
pesticide coordinator for the University of Georgia College of
Agricultural and Environmental Sciences.
One, Europe is a huge market for U.S. food products like
soybeans.
“If Europe refuses biotech soybeans, it will be tremendous
blow to the industry,” Guillebeau said.
And two, U.S. shoppers don’t ignoreÿEuropean concerns.
“Many are starting to wonder if we shouldn’t be more
concerned,”
he said.
Establishing Regional
Centers
To address these issues and others, the second step in
Glickman’s
plan is for USDA to propose establishing regional centers
nationwide.
These centers would evaluate biotech products long-term and
provide
ongoing information to growers, consumers, researchers and
regulators.
Glickman said biotechnology is changing the way farmers do
business. But social and economic trends, including increased
market concentration, have a powerful effect on farming, too.
So does a rise in contracting, as well as fast-evolving
technologies
such as information power and precision agriculture.
“We’re seeing different marketing techniques such as
organics,
direct marketing, co-ops and niche markets,” he said.
“And
nonfarm, industrial uses for plants are expanding.”
Family farmers, he said, are among his biggest concerns.
Biotechnology
should lead to greater — not fewer — options for farmers.
“As this technology develops,” he said, “we
must reach a balance between fairness to farmers and corporate
returns.”
(Dan Glickman photograph courtesy of U. S. Department of
Agriculture.)
