- Credibility of regulatory authorities, including Codex
- Food safety from the consumer viewpoint
- Appropriate basis for testing GE foods
- Provision of information to consumers – incl. labelling
FIRST TIER
Credibility of regulatory authorities, including Codex Mentions 19
Consumers
- Health: GE has had a pretty bad track record from its earliest products, e.g. rBGH, the food supplement l-tryptophan. This was not discussed and neither were the current concerns over anti-biotic resistance genes used in the GE process.
- Due to poor representation many consumers mistrust all regulators and agencies – consider they lack credibility. Very difficult to build this credibility.
- Consumer confidence in regulatory bodies / processes is lacking.
- Trustworthy regulation that is open / transparent.
- This leads to perception of doubtful credibility. We are permitted to see only one side of the coin. Therefore, the consumer lacks confidence / distrust in regulatory agencies.
- Credibility issues: World Health Organisation has greatest influence at Codex – the track record has seen tremendous influence of industry – both as a participant and as government adviser. Also domination of Northern industrial countries at the expense of the Southern countries. So with influence of the food industry (which has seen tremendous consolidation, Seed ® inputs ® production & sales) how much credence and trust can we have in the standards put forward by Codex. GT was quoted as the sole consumer input – this is problematic in itself.
Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers
- Confidence in regulatory bodies
- Given the contentious nature of the GMF debate, the agency regulating GMF’s must be credible and have the confidence of consumers.
Research
- Establishing credibility in regulation setting
- GM foods must be safe for the vast majority of consumers – regulatory system through ANZFA and Codex appears satisfactory.
- Common standards on food legislation of GM foods. Codex standards need to be lined up with ANZFA standards.
- Government needs to manage the GE debate in a way that will provide direction and enhance consumer confidence.
Other issues impact on GE regulation Mentions 9
Consumers
- Regulations. Should consider broader social and ideological implications making labelling and identification of products accountable / sensitive to these issues.
- Industrialisation of food as a function outside the influence of the people who consume it.
- Inability to see food in its holistic nature soil (environment) « food « people
- Lack of evidence which includes cultural, ethical, moral and scientific as ‘part of’ the standards.
- Environmental impacts of the food produced through GMO / GE basis.
- Inability of science and risk analysis to adequately portray ethical, cultural and social aspects of food which impinge on health and safety as a function of mental, as well as physical health and safety.
- Ethics, customs: Codex cannot be solely based on ‘science’ and be subservient to trade. People’s cultural and religious concerns have to be given concerted concern.
- Codex processes severely constrained, by failure to encompass the wider debate surrounding food – especially cultural, ethical, societal, environment and freedom of choice.
Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers
Research
- Consideration of personal issues (e.g. religious considerations) which will require labelling.
Food safety from the consumer viewpoint Mentions 9
Consumers
- Need, therefore, for Codex standard setting to go beyond the limitations of science in determining health and safety.
- Essential priority of Codex standards is to protect consumers’ health and safety. Trade and manufacturing needs are secondary to this.
- Essential the Codex system is able to reflect consumer needs in a manner that enables growers to fulfil those needs.
Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers
- How we measure this consumer safety, i.e. science / evidence of.
- GM food safety will always be difficult to prove safe alongside conventional foods because it is a younger industry.
- Health and safety should be the prime objective of the setting a standard for GMFs.
Research
- Safety – no health adverse effects on people in normal health (physical health)
- Consumer safety e.g. allergens have not been transferred in the process of genetic modification.
- Views of consumer organisations must be heard but must not hold undue sway particularly when biased or subjective rather than objective constituents (?)
Appropriate basis for testing GE foods Mentions 8
Consumers
- Testing methodology for detecting GE foods. At present too many unknowns plus GE changes are “unseen” in foods presented to the consumers – difficult issue to address.
- Methodology needs to take into account the precautionary principle.
Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers
- Verification – methods – conformance.
- Health and safety must be based on sound science (evidence).
Research
- Testing for safety of GM foods has been latterly satisfactory for the vast majority of consumers using the substantial equivalence principle.
- Establishing an appropriate basis for GE food testing.
- Testing of GM foods. Complex – is there a universal standard which is acceptable?
- Establishment of testing procedures (including Agenda Item 4 – Codex) which are objective and robust.
Provision of information to consumers – incl. labelling Mentions 8
Consumers
- Scientific analysis does not insure the safety of foods derived from biotechnology – many unknown actors – premature application of biotechnology to foods makes regulation for safety and labelling key issues.
- ‘Substantial equivalence’ is a term poorly used at present. It assumes ‘minor’ changes result in things being ‘the same’ or thereabouts.
- Labelling criteria.
Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers
- Provision of information that enables consumers to make food choices must be provided for within the standard.
- Consumer information. Labelling. Both sides of the story. Evidence.
- Any standard that us established for GMFs must be accompanied with consumer information (given the contentious and complex nature of the debate)
Research
- Dissemination of information about standards and safety tests.
- GM foods must be a reliable source of healthy foods for the vast majority of consumers. Potential allergenicity (e.g.) must be a clear labelling issue.
| © MAF 2000 |  |
|
| MAFnet Help | Important Disclaimer |
Contact for Enquiries
Dr Sharon Adamson
Manager,
Innovation Policy
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 0618
Fax: +64 4 4 894 0741
Contact this person
