The soul of the scientific process is challenge and revision based on new information. Three years ago sound science indicated FDA should approve the diet drug Phen-Fen. Last year new information, new sound science if you will, caused FDA to declare the drug extremely dangerous and to order the manufacturer to get it off the market immediately. Third, public policy on genetically engineered food products should be based on the most complete data and the most rigorous science. But in the end public policy is more than science.
Policy represents a choice among competing interests and values.
Policymakers must balance a corporation's desire to bring new products to market and thereby enhance shareholder value and a farmer's interest in increasing yield against the public's concern that this new technology has not been sufficiently examined for long-term safety effects and holds no benefit for consumers. The current U.S. policy governing the safety of genetically engineered foods will not support the level of public confidence necessary for the technology to succeed. It needs more than a little cleaning up here and there. It must be completely rethought and revised. The products of agricultural biotechnology have been robbed of the rigorous review that would make it possible for both government and industry to rebut attacks on their safety.