9 April 2003
GM JURY CHALLENGES FSA PANEL ON LABELLING
The conclusion of the FSA's citizens' jury were in some ways no surprise,
given the FSA's involvement, but the FSA may not be keen to focus on
some of the implications of its findings.
for more on the FSA:
How the Food Standards Agency is part of a global GM spin operation
https://members.tripod.com/~ngin/fsa.htm
***
GM JURY CHALLENGES FSA POLICY ON LABELLING
Apr 8
http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_releases/gm_jury_challenges_fsa_pol.html
The views of the Food Standards Agency's (FSA) Citizens' Jury on GM
food, held yesterday [1], seriously challenge the Agency's own policies,
Friends of the Earth said today.
While the jury voted nine to six in favour of allowing GM food to be
available in the UK, all 15 jurors called for "effective labelling
and monitoring of GM foods; for example, a GM food logo
to ensure that people can make a genuine choice to eat or to avoid
eating GM foods" [2].
The FSA have consistently lobbied against the full traceability and
labelling regulations currently being debated by the European
Parliament. The regulation proposes that all GM ingredients in food
and animal feed should be labelled. The FSA support a policy
of no labelling for food containing up to one per cent of GM ingredients
[3].
Friends of the Earth Real Food Campaigner Pete Riley said:
"The jurors clearly share the view of millions of people across
the EU that GM foods and feeds need to be properly labelled
so that people can avoid eating them or feeding them to their livestock.
Their view challenges the FSA policy position which is for minimal
labelling that would mean that the vast majority of GM food would be unlabelled.
It will be interesting to see how the FSA responds and whether they
will follow the example of food companies and retailers and support
full information on GM food instead of pandering to the wishes of
the biotech industry by allowing contamination
to go unlabelled. The jury quite rightly
want monitoring of GM food - but by allowing contamination to go unlabelled
monitoring for health effects in people and animals would be a nightmare".
ENDS
NOTES:
[1] See www.food.gov.uk/[1]
[2] See
www.foodstandards.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/gmlabelchoice[2]
[3] See
www.foodstandards.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/gmlabelchoice[2]
.. [1] http://www.food.gov.uk/
.. [2] http://www.foodstandards.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/gmlabelchoice