Labelling of GE animals sought
However, FDA officials, releasing the Final Guidance on Regulation of Genetically Engineered Animals yesterday, pledged increased transparency in their process for approving drugs and foods from GE animals.
The guidelines sets out the requirements and recommendations for producers of GE animals and products derived from them.
The agency said it will not allow any products from GE animals to be sold without first submitting them to scrutiny by independent advisers at a public meeting, and FDA biotechnology expert Larisa Rudenko added that the agency would not approve any application related to GE animals until it is convinced of its safety and effectiveness.
Policy attack
But Jean Halloran, director of food policy initiatives at the Consumers Union (CU), a nonprofit publisher of consumer reports, said that the FDA’s policy claiming that GE foods are not different from conventional foods and thus do not need to be labelled flies in the face of consumer opinion and common sense.
She said a recent CU poll found that 95 per cent of consumers favour labelling of meat and milk from GE animals: “These foods should be labelled because they are different - in FDA's terms the presence of novel genes is a material fact.”
"If a company engineered a cow with human genes to make the meat more tender, the FDA would appropriately evaluate it only on the scientific safety issues,” said Michael Hansen, a senior scientist at the CU.
“However consumers and society in general have additional concerns, and we think it is essential that products be labelled, so consumers can act on their individual ethics and values,” he added.
New traits
Genetically engineered (GE) animals are not clones, which the FDA has already determined as being safe to eat. While clones are exact copies of an animal, it is the DNA of a GE animal that has been altered to produce a desirable characteristic.
The FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) said it has been working with developers of GE animals on both early stage and more mature applications.
And, according to the CVM, such animals could have new traits such as improved nutrition, faster growth or lower emission levels of environmentally harmful substances such as phosphate in their manure.
Identification tags
Scott Eilert, director of the meat technology department at Cargill, recently called for a national animal identification system to ensure the confidence of US consumers in the food supply when GE animals enter the marketplace.
He was speaking at a public debate on the commercialization of GE animals in November, which was organised by the US Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and the Center for American Progress (CAP).
Eilert said that meat processors want any pre-market review of GE animals to be thorough and transparent enough to allow consumers to continue to exercise their right to choose which products they wish to consume.
He added that such a review should take into account factors regarding food safety, animal welfare, health and nutrition as well as environmental impact.
More awareness
Jamie Jonkers, director of regulatory affairs at the US National Milk Producers Federation, who participated in the CSPI debate, also argues that a requirement for the labelling of GE animals and products should be included in the regulation.
And Gregory Jaffe, director of the CSPI Biotechnology Project, claims that in order for consumers to be less sceptical about the technology, GE animal producers and other stakeholders in the supply chain need to instigate an education campaign to make the public more aware of the benefits of GE food products and the regulation involved.
