Добавил:
Upload Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
УЧЕБНИК ДЛЯ БАКАЛАВРИАТА 2 ЧАСТЬ.doc
Скачиваний:
231
Добавлен:
23.03.2015
Размер:
1.21 Mб
Скачать

Focus 4

4.1. Read the text below and find the facts proving that safety assessment of ge foods is essential for people’s health.

Inadequate Safety Assessment of ge Foods

A very careful procedure is necessary for establishing the safety of GE foods. However this is not the case. No genetically engineered food on the market has been adequately tested for safety.

In stead of careful testing, a procedure has been used that may let through harmful GE foods.

The only requirement for approval is that the GE food should be grossly similar to its natural counterpart. This is called the principle of "substantial equivalence" (SE). However, a GE food may not only be grossly similar, but almost completely identical with its natural counterpart and yet contain an unexpected and undiscovered harmful substance. It is a scientifically well recognized fact that genetic engineering can cause the appearance of unexpected very harmful substances. Molecular biological theory as well as experimental findings indicate that unexpected substances may be created in GE foods. This includes carcinogenic (cancer-generating), mutagenic (mutation-generating), poisonous and allergenic substances. Consequently, foods approved on the basis of "substantial equivalence" are not safe to eat. This includes all GE foods on the market in the world. They have all been approved on the basis of "substantial equivalence".

To decide if a GE food is substantially equivalent, only a limited set of characteristics (selected by the manufacturer) needs to be compared according to this principle. If this superficial testing procedure reveals no significant difference between the GE food and its natural counterpart, then no further food safety testing is required.

So it is assumed that GE foods are safe if they are "substantially equivalent". This assumption would have been valid only if genetic engineering had been a safe technology that never could give rise to unexpected substances.

During year 2000 criticism and rejections of the approval procedure based on "substantial equivalence" began to be expressed by important bodies of scientists. This includes among others the US National Academy of Science; its Canadian counterpart, the Royal society and the The UK Medical Research Council. It has also recently been revealed that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), suppressed serious concerns about the safety of GE foods expressed by its own experts.

Why did this unreliable assessment method appear?

To be reliable, the testing demanded by food safety experts would have cost millions of dollar in each case. In addition, it would have delayed their approval for years as such testing takes long time. Billions of dollars had already been invested in the development GE foods and such demands and delays would have made the GE food projects unprofitable.

US FDA played a key role in officially declaring (1994) that these foods were as safe as natural ones (this they did in spite of warnings by their own experts, who however were silenced).

We recommend that foods that have been approved on the basis of the principle of Substantial Equivalence should be declared unsafe and be withdrawn from the market. If it takes time to implement this, mandatory labeling is necessary for all GE foods and food containing GE components.

Source: Living Earth. Режим доступа: http://www.psrast.org/mianbree.htm

Size: 3,182 characters with spaces