The 1999 GE Food Debates: The Turning Point.

AuthorVerzola, Roberto
PositionGenetically engineered food

The year 1999 marks what might be the turning point in the global fight against genetically-engineered (GE) food, as the issue began to grip media and public attention. Renewed debate flared in the British media in February 1999, when some 20 scientists from 13 countries issued a statement deploring the harsh treatment by Scotland's Rowett Research Institute of world-renowned British researcher and lectin expert Dr. Arpad Pusztai and demanding his reinstatement. Pusztai had earlier begun a [pound]1.6-million study which indicated that a GE potato diet weakened rats' immune systems and adversely affected the animals' internal organs. When he shared with the media (with his superior's permission) some of his concerns, Pusztai was promptly sacked from his research post. His papers were confiscated, he was prohibited from talking to the media, and his research team was closed down.

Pusztai Case Prods Anti-GE Backlash

The strong statement by the 20 scientists calling for a review of Pusztai's case launched a wave of investigative reports, bringing into the open many of the little-known unresolved questions about GE food safety. Surveys revealed increasing consumer aversion to GE food. Market response was swift. Reacting to clearly-expressed consumer preferences, one food processor and distributor after another announced that they were keeping their products and shelves GE-free.

In May 1999, the British Medical Association (BMA), which counts some 80% or nearly 115,000 of Britain's medical doctors, issued an official statement expressing concern over the safety of GE foods. The BMA recommended a moratorium on planting commercial GE crops in the UK "until there is scientific consensus (or as close agreement as reasonably achievable) about the potential long-term environmental effects." The BMA also called for (1) segregation at source, "to enable identification and traceability" of GE foods; (2) labeling GE imports and banning unlabelled ones if the industry refuses to segregate; and (3) more robust systems of disease surveillance, to deal with "potential emergence of new diseases associated with GM material which will be obscure and difficult to diagnose."

Also in May, Cornell University assistant professor John Losey and his colleagues announced a study, which showed that Bt corn pollen was deadly to monarch butterflies. Within days, the bad news made the headlines, bringing into the US public's attention the unresolved issues about GE food safety.

The monarch study launched another anti-GE...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT