As a result, biotech pharmaceuticals have been a relatively successful branch of the industry. A pure scientist would make the case against overregulation solely on these grounds and then stop, but here Miller's regulatory experience comes into play. Something similar undoubtedly goes on in the private sector as well, but there one finds corrective counterforces such as the need ultimately to create products useful to others. Here, however, we have policies that benefit only the agencies that administer them or the dominant companies shielded from new competition. That, coupled with the presence of EPA agents dressed in moon suits at the long-delayed field trial, was enough to kill the project.
Humans fare no better than plants.
But as Miller points out, this rationalization is overblown. Most of our domestically produced cheese, for example, is made using a biotech enzyme, but this process has triggered neither consumer riots nor depressed pizza sales. Miller's style and approach are lively. Sometimes Miller's charges sound a little too pat. An approval that misfires can produce highly visible victims and intense political heat.