Biotechnology is still hotly debated.

Biotechnology continues to stir up public debate, in particular its use for agricultural production. Consumer Alert staff has been actively involved in the debate through media work and other activities.

In June, Consumer Alert's executive director Frances Smith participated in a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) briefing of agricultural specialists working as Foreign Service Nationals in more than 20 countries. Smith, as well as a representative from Consumers Union, provided the participants with their organizations' positions and perspectives on agricultural biotechnology.

Smith also helped brief officials from countries belonging to the Gulf Cooperation Council on July 17, organized by USDA's Foreign Agriculture Service. Smith presented the visitors from Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, UAE, and Saudi Arabia with an overview of consumer attitudes toward agricultural biotechnology in the U.S. and the public debate about labeling.

Update: Since the last issue of Consumer Comments, the United Nations Development Program has published its annual Human Development Report, which this year focused in particular on the potential of modern technologies to improve living conditions in poorer countries. The report noted the use of modern biotechnology to improve food security. The authors of the report see the use of genetic modification of crops to make them more adaptable to harsh environmental conditions as a potentially useful instrument to help poor countries. It takes on the "precautionary principle" in pointing out that risk assessment must look at not only the risk of the new but also the risk of the status quo. While realizing that many other socioeconomic and political conditions need improvement for a sustainable improvement in living conditions, the report also recommends exploring the potential benefits of biotechnology.

Meantime, the European Union has published its new proposal for stricter labeling regulations for foods derived from modern biotechnology. The new requirements obligate all producers to label foods and seeds derived from biotechnology. It will set a threshold for food products of 1 percent for ingredients which contain genetically modified DNA under which a product would not have to be labeled. It also excludes the genetic engineered enzyme used in cheese production -- chymosin. That product, which replaces the rennet from slaughtered calves' stomachs, is widely used in cheese production in several EU countries. Presumably even biotech-skeptical consumers might prefer the genetic engineered enzyme to that collected from its "traditional" source. The law would also require producers to be able to trace all the genetically modified food ingredients and seed to their exact source -- a demand that could increase the costs for producers and consumers.