People who are concerned about the environment will appreciate less pesticide and herbicide use, increased use of no-till agriculture, and less deforestation in sensitive ecosystems because food demand can be met by increased yields on existing farmland. People in developing countries will benefit by planting crops tolerant of local soil and weather conditions, increasing yields without expensive chemical treatments for disease by using virus resistant varieties, and getting basic nutrition from crops enriched with essential vitamins and minerals not present in sufficient quantities in the traditional diet. It is rare for a new technology to receive a broad and enthusiastic welcome. For example, pasteurized milk was originally viewed with deep suspicion, although it is a life-saving technology in its elimination of the microorganisms that cause tuberculosis and undulant fever. Similarly, all sorts of health threats far beyond pacemaker interference were originally attributed to microwave cooking.
Biotechnology is no exception.
Although it is not surprising that consumers are wary of rDNA biotechnology-derived foods, the scientific evidence does not support their concerns, said Miller. Numerous national and international scientific organizations have considered the potential risks associated with rDNA biotechnology-derived foods and have consistently concluded that these foods pose risks less severe, or no more severe, than those risks associated with conventional breeding techniques that have been practiced for centuries. The science involved in many of these issues is extremely complex. People worry about potential risks that sound logical, given their understanding of the science. However, a thorough analysis reveals that the risks have already been adequately addressed, Miller said.