Ottawa Citizen
Sunday January 23, 2000 

'Stop genetic pollution'
More than 600 demonstrate at UN biological diversity talks
Nicolas Van Praet; with files from Pauline Tam

  
MONTREAL -- Amid rumours that the Battle in Seattle would become the Brawl in 
Montreal, riot police were on standby yesterday as more than 600 noisy 
protesters, carrying signs that read "Stop Genetic Pollution," took to the 
streets, crying out against genetically modified food and the World Trade 
Organization. 

But what was a West-coast melee the last time WTO delegates met, did not 
repeat itself in this city. 

As representatives from more than 130 countries hustled behind closed doors 
in the United Nations building downtown to begin hammering out an 
international protocol on genetically modified foods, critics of 
biotechnology shouted their message outside in the cold. 

Then, about an hour and many "Frankenfood" slogans later, they went back to 
the Universite de Quebec a Montreal to continue their lectures and workshops. 

Not enough long-term testing is done before genetically altered foods hit the 
market, they said. The world community has an obligation to put human health 
and environmental concerns over trade liberalization, they argued, and put 
mandatory labeling on altered foods. 

"For five years, we've been eating genetically modified foods that are on the 
market without Canadian consumers even knowing it," said Francis Clermont of 
Biotech Action Montreal. 

The main point of contention at the international conference is whether or 
not countries have the right under international trade rules to block the 
import of genetically modified products if they believe those products pose a 
threat to human health or the environment. 

But the larger question, and the one that pitted scientist against scientist 
yesterday, was whether or not there is enough testing done on altered foods 
before humans consume them. 

In one corner was a coalition of Canadian scientists urging food companies to 
"stay the course." Through biotechnology, they argued, scientists are "on the 
verge of being able to use crops and foods to deliver life-saving nutrients, 
medicines and vaccines to people in the less developed world." 

In the other corner was a loose association of freelance scholars from around 
the world, warning that we still have too little understanding of how 
organisms interact and how genes interact. 

Biotechnology involves swapping genetic coding between plants. Trials are 
also being done taking animal materials and transferring them to plants. 

"We should not do that kind of switching just because we can do it," argued 
Ricarda Steinbrecher, a genetic scientist trained at the University of 
London. 

"It can lead us into an irreversible situation where we can't get out again." 

There is no proper system in place to monitor the development of genetically 
altered organisms, Ms. Steinbrecher said, adding that most studies are funded 
by private companies with their own interests in mind, not the government's. 

Not true, countered Gord Surgeoner, president of Ontario Agri-Food 
Technologies. 

Mr. Surgeoner argued that genetically modified foods are subject to 
regulations even more rigorous than those for conventional foods in Canada. 

Our number one food problem in this country is consuming too much of it, he 
argued. Number two is the danger from microbial organisms infecting food. 

"Compared to those, any perceived risk associated with this technology is 
small." 

But that risk is often not measured properly, Ms. Steinbrecher said. Things 
like how genetically altered crops affect soil in the long term or how people 
with allergies might respond after eating new compounds that have never been 
tested on humans are big questions that are often overlooked, she said. 

"How are you going to do that kind of research when a company wants to get 
the product on the market quickly?" 

Proponents of biotechnology yesterday stuck mostly to arguments about the 
good things it brings and said protests against it are regressive. 

"These protests bring negative attention to our ability to use technology for 
good uses," said Milly Ryan-Harshman, an independent nutritionist. 

A coalition of more than 750 international scientists released a petition 
declaring their support for food biotechnology. 

"We in the scientific community felt it necessary to counteract the baseless 
attacks so often made on biotechnology and genetically modified foods," said 
petition organizer C.S. Prakash in a written statement. 

Mr. Prakash, a biology professor at Tuskegee University in Alabama, says that 
biotechnology is a valuable tool in making foods more productive and 
nutritious, particularly to countries that suffer from malnutrition and food 
shortages.