GM Science Review - Comments on First Report

Return to index of comments

Name: John Dutton Location (optional): Norwich Date: 30 September 2003
Title (optional):
Full comment:

Dear Sirs,
Within Chapter 5:"GM Derived Food and Animal Feed Safety" of the "GM Science Review:First Report" there are no references to food/feed safety evaluations of GM oilseed rape, GM maize or pulp from GM sugar beet.

So, the authors of this chapter are not following the recommendation in the Royal Society's Report Ref.11/99 of June 1999 which in referring to possible toxicity of GM potatoes, states:"In view of the public interest in this case, we recommend that the results of future studies on testing GM food safety, when completed, should be peer reviewed and then published.".

To my way of thinking, this lack of published safety evaluation information is at the root of general public opposition to GM crops.

One finds in Chapter 5, for example on page 78 under "Regulatory approach", a statement, as follows:"Indeed, in many respects there is far greater safety evaluation of GM crops and derived foods, which require extensive testing in comparison with conventional crops, which require no mandatory testing at all.". Thus safety evaluation is being carried out but it is not being peer reviewed and published. Why is that please ?

Please can the results of all safety evaluations of GM crops therefore be peer reviewed and published as the Royal Society recommended in 1999 ?

Yours sincerely,

John Dutton B.Sc. C.Chem. F.R.S.C.
Sugar Industry & Biotechnology Consultancy
18 Nursery Close
Norwich NR13 3EH