On-Demand Supplier Webinar
Yogurt Formulations with Clarinol® CLA for Weight Management
Stepan Lipid Nutrition
The American Medical Association (AMA) House of Delegates has called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered (GE) foods – but said there is currently no reason to label them.
The AMA House of Delegates weighed in on the debate over labeling of foods that contain ingredients produced through genetic engineering at its annual meeting on Wednesday, issuing a position statement that says there is no scientific justification for special labeling of bioengineered foods.
It added: “Voluntary labeling is without value unless it is accompanied by focused consumer education.”
The organization said it “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.”
In its statement, the AMA also said it “supports mandatory pre-market systematic safety assessments of bioengineered foods”.
Specifically, it urged the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to remain alert to new data about the health effects of GE foods and to update its policies accordingly.
The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said that the position recognizes that there is currently no evidence that there are material differences or safety concerns in available bioengineered foods.
She added: “Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public. We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”
‘Labeling may confuse consumers’
The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) issued a statement welcoming the AMA’s policy, and pointed out that the position was in line with the FDA’s and other scientific bodies’ position that GE foods are materially the same as non-GE foods.
“Because foods and beverages that contain GE ingredients are no different than those that do not, mandatory labeling of foods containing GE ingredients is unnecessary and may actually confuse consumers,” the GMA said.
“Labeling information should be reserved for important food safety and/or nutrition information, such as allergen warnings or front-of-pack nutrition labeling.”
California consumers are set to vote on labeling of genetically modification in foods in November, after a campaign to include the measure on the ballot attracted nearly a million signatures.
20 comments (Comments are now closed)
GMO FOOD
Who do they think they are kidding is well said? Why because from all clinical tests on GMO indicates the failure to provide any positive benifit to health.
Therefore GMO types of tests appear to be inappropriate. It may be only a matter of time before this is realised, from analitical information of sufficient data is collected on increasing diseases.
Report abuse
Posted by Harry
02 July 2012 | 17h31
Corrupt AMA
"First, do no harm"? And on what basis does the AMA conclude that subjecting the clearly unwilling public to an unstoppable mass medical experiment (with severe environmental consequences, to boot), constitutes "doing no harm" or voluntary consent?
Report abuse
Posted by Jennifer
27 June 2012 | 06h42
FDA, USDA, Congress & AMA completely corrupt with Biotech money
Big Agro continues to pollute our food supply with toxic pesticides and GMO foods when there is substantial evidence that such practices do harm to our health and environment. They have the regulatory agencies controlled by their endless money which is in part subsidized by our tax payers, yet they have no accountability or labeling requirements to prove the long term safety of such products. Regulators simply look the other way and make excuses for them. This is a complete outrage and so typical of the corrupting influence of special interest money over politicians and regulators.
Make no mistake, there is NOTHING natural about Genetically modified food, in which toxic substances are inserted into the plants DNA. There's nothing safe about Glyphosates and dioxins, regardless of the lies to the contrary.
Would you really want to feed this poison to your baby if you knew there was a chance it could harm? Yet we are prevented from knowing the truth due to the pseudo science and propaganda upheld by these virtually unregulated Biotech Giants.
The only safe foods are truly natural and organic and time tested.
Report abuse
Posted by dave
26 June 2012 | 23h19
GMO not materially different? Bullsh**!
Who are they kidding? You don't get a patent for something that's not - at a minimum - different. Specific proteins are coded for by inserted genes and manufactured by the plant for specific qualities NOT NATURALLY FOUND in the end product. I, THE CONSUMER, DESERVE TO KNOW WHAT'S BEEN PUT INTO MY FOOD.
Report abuse
Posted by Lydia Freund
26 June 2012 | 17h40
AMA Bought and paid for!
Hey AMA, the safety tests are being conducted NOW on us! DUH!
Report abuse
Posted by Robert
25 June 2012 | 23h56
Knowledge is a right
The 'may actually confuse consumers' line says it all, and is in line with a growing trend. Treat adults in our society like they are ignorant children who shouldn't be confused with too many ideas or facts. Feed them the facts that they can 'handle' so that they'll make the 'right' decision
If we are adults, making adult decisions, than we NEED information to be able to MAKE those decisions. Whether we make good or bad decisions is up to us, NOT them. Yeah, we may screw up, we make get nervous - that's part of being an ADULT. Depriving us of information is not helping people, it's only helping companies.
A great example is food dyes in the USA. The FDA looked into food dyes and finally decided that the evidence shows they DO have a negative affect on some children, but not ALL children. And since it's not all children, food dyes don't need a warning label.
If my children are some of those who are affected, this lack of information has now caused my family physical harm. But this same lack of information prevented many companies from losing money over a few people deciding on extra caution for their children's health.
When something is already in public use, and has not been fully studied, choosing the path that allows potential harm to the consumer rather than to a company's bottom line is never the better choice.
Report abuse
Posted by shaunamom
25 June 2012 | 20h49
uneducated public?
Consumers will be confused with the GMO info? Is this a unintended comment on our school systems? The same systems that produced AMA members? Back to the real issue--with the allergy concerns I have, I am a constant label-reader. But that does me no good if the labels don't give me the information I need to make an educated choice. With all the questions swirling around the safety/risk of GMOs, wouldn't the wisest course of action be to err on the side of caution and wait until time has given enough evidence to support the safety claims? This could be accomplished by conducting a longitudinal study with people eating GMO food as the experimental group, and people eating non-GMO food as a control group. But this would require time, which would hit a lot of bottom lines....
In the meantime, I deserve the right to make my own choice!!!!
Report abuse
Posted by lm
25 June 2012 | 14h44
We're the guinea pigs
They don't need to label them, because they are testing them. On US! We are the guinea pigs. That is obvious.
Report abuse
Posted by Kathy
25 June 2012 | 08h12
WE'LL Tell You What You Need To Know
The arrogance! Is this the same AMA that stood behind the Vioxx debacle? The same AMA that told us Premarin was safe? With medicine being the 3rd leading cause of death in America, I don't think their governing body has the right to determine what we, the public, should and should not know about the food we eat every day. Their own body count is way too high to be my watchdog.
Report abuse
Posted by KD
22 June 2012 | 22h38
First Do No Harm
What happened to that rule, AMA? Labeling does not confuse consumers; not labeling does. We're not confused. We don't want GMOs no matter how safe, good, identical, or otherwise benign you insist it is. What about what WE want?
Report abuse
Posted by Sophie
22 June 2012 | 21h35
NO INDEPENDENT TESTING
The FDA does no testing of products presented to them. They depend on the testing done by those that have made and presents the foods or drugs that are to be presented to the public...Would you tell them if your product is dangerous or didn't workk at all????????????????
Report abuse
Posted by Barb
22 June 2012 | 20h05
Yeah Sure
Just because they are medical doctors doesn't mean they know everything. Where are their test results on GE products?
Report abuse
Posted by John Reilly
22 June 2012 | 01h59
Yes.
We are so stupid, we would be confused and so need protection against our own ignorance. GMAFB. They could surely come up with a better reason than this, no? Or maybe they're just confused.
Report abuse
Posted by zephmarie
22 June 2012 | 00h41
Yes
We are that stupid that we would be confused and so must be protected from our own bloody ignorance. GMAFB. They can surely come up with something better than this.
Report abuse
Posted by zehmarie
22 June 2012 | 00h39
The real issue of the AMA stance is. How was it paid for.
Other than the obvious AMA vested interest in a unhealthy population where their members are the pinnacle of the social and financial elite.
It's disgusting enough that health care is dominated charlatans offering snake oil solutions to problems that wouldn't develop if the population ate properly but now they want to introduce more slow poison on the masses.
Report abuse
Posted by Frank
21 June 2012 | 21h21
Liars
Why is it that the cafeterias at Monsanto DO NOT serve GMO's?
Report abuse
Posted by Trubs
21 June 2012 | 21h04
Is safety really the issue?
Why is there a reason to pretest GE foods if they are safe? That would be making the assumption there is the possibility of a safety issue and I don't want to be eating the stuff for 10 years before they find out it's dangerous. Anyway, as I see it, safety (meaning it won't kill me immediately) isn't the main issue. the issue is the long term effects on my health.
I don't care about the AMA's supposed "lack of evidence". Too many foods and DRUGS get into the market that have been tested as safe and then turn out to be lethal. Let's make judgements based on evidence (not lack of evidence), and so far, not enough corroborative evidence has been gathered to assure the public that GE food is safe.
Many thousands of people have spoken and want to know what they are eating. The AMA does not have the right to take that away from us. I do not need the AMA to educate me on nutrition, I've done a very good job of that already. If the AMA wants to be the nutrition expert, THEY had better educate themselves first.
Report abuse
Posted by Sandra
21 June 2012 | 19h59
Of Course
This is a predictable position since the AMA does not hold the public interest as a priority. Indeed it is a self-serving corporate instrument and interestingly assumes itself an "authority " on food nutrition. Medical school barely touches upon nutrition and diet, only recently has there been increased emphasis on food choices as a medical concern. The AMA is not the voice of the people nor a nutrition pundit.
The American people have a constitutional right to know about unnatural food ingredients in their food. GMO is by definition unnatural.
Report abuse
Posted by MA
21 June 2012 | 19h04
Who does the testing
If the biotech companies do the safety testing themselves, then of course they don't find any adverse health effects or risk of allergic reactions from eating their GMOs. Nor any environmental risks of GMOs, either. That is the fox guarding the hen house, at it's worst. Unbiased studies show different effects from GMOs and great cause for concern. The AMA is not on the side of consumers on this issue, from the looks of it. More favorable to the GMO food industry. Sounds like they are more interested in 'educating' the consumers about how great the GMOs are, instead of letting us know we are eating them, and finding out for ourselves if they are safe for us, or not. And if they are so safe, as claimed, why are the biotech companies spending mega-millions of dollars to fight against labeling, and the peoples right to know. Think about that. And think about who's side the AMA is 'really' on.
Report abuse
Posted by DJ
21 June 2012 | 19h03
Really?
Great, so let's keep the public in the dark and justify the reason to the enth degree. The measure is only asking for transparency on what people are consuming. It is a basic right. Period. That is great AMA supports safety testing but labeling is a first step while long term safety testing is performed by non-biased, independent groups. 40+ other countries label GMO's and the USA, one of the world leaders, doesn't feel like the public has the right to know. 90% of Americans would like to know what is in their food and there is no arguing with that.
Report abuse
Posted by Chase
21 June 2012 | 18h00
Read all comments (20)