No evidence GM food is harmful, therefore safe?
This is exactly the sentiment that the editors at the New Scientist, the respected British science magazine, blasted in their editorial (Sept 15, 2001), "First it was BSE (mad-cow disease). More recently, foot and mouth disease. And in between there was genetically modified food. When will we learn that with issues as fundamental as food and health, the government will get nowhere by simply insisting that there is no danger, if people think it is putting industry profits ahead of public well-being?"
Indeed, biotechnology is heavily pushed by industry.
I remember seeing on British television a few years ago, in trying to persuade the sceptical British public that beef was safe, the agricultural minister then fed his young daughter of about five years a beef-burger in full glare of the media. Then it was thought that BSE cannot occur in humans. Soon after, it was proved that BSE in cows can jump to humans in the form of the Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, CJD. I hope the daughter is still fine and she is still talking to her father. (What some politicians would do for publicity!)
Tech-savvy
A similar argument invoking scientific alibi, as Harrison did, was used then, namely that "there was no evidence linking BSE and CJD. Beef is safe".
What does "no evidence" mean? It only means that, as of now, there is no evidence, but in future that evidence may turn up. So, the good doctor is being a bit disingenuous. Given that the government is gung-ho on biotechnology/genetic engineering, and given the required pledge of loyalty by government servants yet, if they have nothing to hide, why oppose labeling?). So, we don't know if we are eating GM food. There is danger of allergic reactions, among other problems.
So the next time you hear that line of argument that there is "no evidence to show that GM food is harmful to human health", just don't swallow all of it.
Dr ROSLI OMAR is an academic interested on the impact of science and technology on society and environment (being bred on the white-heat of technology creed himself), be they dams, biotechnology/genetic engineering, or polluting machines. He believes technology, as used at present, is sustaining an unsustainable development — the worst of all possible paradoxes.

