http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20001207/2896231s.htm
7 December 2000

USA Today

Reject gene-altered corn

 One of the easiest decisions any federal regulator will ever get to
make is hanging fire at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), where
officials are being asked to approve for  human consumption a type of
corn that has been genetically jiggered to produce its own pesticide.

 Two scientific reviews have failed to produce conclusive evidence that
eating the corn, called StarLink, won't produce allergic reactions in
infants and young children. On that basis alone, the EPA should deny
the request. But the nature of the problem -- particularly, the threat
to public confidence in genetically modified foods -- invites rejection
for other reasons as well.

 Because the EPA questioned StarLink corn's safety in human foods, it
was approved in 1998 only for animal feed and industrial uses, such as
making ethanol. A scientific panel affirmed the EPA's caution last
winter, concluding there was insufficient data to judge the corn safe or
not.

 Since then, however, the corn has found its way into the food supply.
At least 300 products including taco shells and chips have been recalled
since September. StarLink's maker, Aventis  CropScience, surrendered the
corn's market permits and pulled the corn off the market. But the
company is still on the hook for retrieving outstanding corn, an effort
that will cost more than $100 million.

 After the corn was found in food products, Aventis, which originally
wanted permanent approval of the corn for human consumption, asked the 
EPA for temporary approval. Under the requested four-year reprieve, the 
pesticidal kernels would be allowed to travel through the food supply. 
At a hastily arranged meeting of an EPA science panel last month, Aventis 
and others argued the risk to human health was slight.

  Indeed, the panel this week concluded the risk of reactions is low,
given the small amounts in the food supply. But it also said there was a
''medium likelihood'' the corn's suspect protein was an allergen, that
the scientific data was still inconclusive and that further study was
needed.

 Given the uncertainties, the EPA can hardly grant even temporary
approval. The health questions are no better resolved today than two 
years ago. And giving Aventis a no-harm, no-foul pass will look like a 
bailout to skeptical consumers and critics.

 About 70% of the foods in grocery stores today are genetically modified
in some way, and consumers accept these products because regulators
impose rigorous standards. Allowing  Aventis to walk away from its own
food-safety commitments would compromise the integrity of federal
oversight and erode consumer confidence.

 Aventis agreed to keep its ''Frankencorn'' out of the food supply. For
whatever reason, it failed. Now it seeks after-the-fact permission for
that violation. To this, the answer is easy. Both as a matter of science
and regulatory integrity, the correct response is -- no.Today's debate:
Genetically modified corn Firm aims to keep tainted food products on
market.