The
following Policy Statement was approved on June 20, 2012 by the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association.
Bioengineered Foods
(1)
Our AMA recognizes the continuing validity of the three major
conclusions
contained in the 1987 National Academy of Sciences white paper
"Introduction of Recombinant DNA-Engineered Organisms into the
Environment." [The three major conclusions are: (a)There is no evidence
that unique hazards exist either in the use of rDNA techniques
or in the movement of genes between unrelated organisms; (b) The risks
associated with the introduction of rDNA-engineered organisms are the
same in kind as those associated with the introduction of unmodified
organisms and organisms modified by other methods;
(c) Assessment of the risk of introducing rDNA-engineered organisms into
the environment should be based on the nature of the organism and the
environment into which it is introduced, not on the method by which it
was produced.)
(2)
That federal regulatory oversight of agricultural biotechnology should
continue to be science-based and guided by the characteristics of the
plant or animal, its intended use, and the environment into which it is
to be introduced, not by the method used to produce it, in order to
facilitate comprehensive, efficient regulatory
review of new bioengineered crops and foods.
(3)
Our AMA believes that as June 2012, there is no scientific
justification
for special labeling of bioengineered foods, as a class, and that
voluntary labeling is without value unless it is accompanied by focused
consumer education.
(4)
Our AMA supports mandatory pre-market systematic safety assessments of
bioengineered foods and encourages: (a) development and validation of
additional techniques for the detection and/or assessment of unintended
effects; (b) continued use of methods to detect substantive changes in
nutrient or toxicant levels in bioengineered
foods as part of a substantial equivalence evaluation; (c) development
and use of alternative transformation technologies to avoid utilization
of antibiotic resistance markers that code for clinically relevant
antibiotics, where feasible; and (d) that priority
should be given to basic research in food allergenicity to support the
development of improved methods for identifying potential allergens. The
FDA is urged to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of
bioengineered foods and update its regulatory
policies accordingly.
(5)
Our AMA supports continued research into the potential consequences to
the environment of bioengineered crops including the: (a) assessment of
the impacts of pest-protected crops on nontarget organisms compared to
impacts of standard agricultural methods, through rigorous field
evaluations; (b) assessment of gene flow and its
potential consequences including key factors that regulate weed
populations; rates at which pest resistance genes from the crop would be
likely to spread among weed and wild populations; and the impact of
novel resistance traits on weed abundance; (c) implementation
of resistance management practices and continued monitoring of their
effectiveness; (d) development of monitoring programs to assess
ecological impacts of pest-protected crops that may not be apparent from
the results of field tests; and (e) assessment of the
agricultural impact of bioengineered foods, including the impact on
farmers.
(6)
Our AMA recognizes the many potential benefits offered by bioengineered
crops and foods, does not support a moratorium on planting bioengineered
crops, and encourages ongoing research developments in food
biotechnology.
(7)
Our AMA urges government, industry, consumer advocacy groups, and the
scientific and medical communities to educate the public and improve the
availability of unbiased information and research activities on
bioengineered foods.
No comments:
Post a Comment