| Comment Record|
Dr. Roger Morton ||
2001-01-31 18:21:45 |
Dr. Roger Morton |
| Comments for FDA General |
1. General Comments
To whom it may concern:
I am writing to let you know that I support the FDA‚s current policy on labeling of foods derived from biotechnology, which requires affirmative labeling only in cases where a material change has been made that affects
nutrition or health. Furthermore, I support FDA‚s new guidelines for voluntary labeling of foods which have or have not been developed using biotechnology.
As a consumer I have full confidence in the regulatory agencies which approve these products and see no reason to create unnecessary, unfair rules for agricultural biotech products. I fear that mandatory labeling of
products, which have been deemed substantially equivalent to their conventional counterparts, will give the false impression that they are inferior to non-biotech products, and that the costs of separating, testing and labeling these products will be an unnecessary burden on
I fear that a move by the FDA to manditory labeling will cascade through the worlds regulatory systems and eventually lead to similar effects in other parts of the world including Australia where I am a consumer of food. I want my food to be cheap and safe. I believe the current FDA system ensures this for US consumers. The Australian regulatory authorities often look to the FDA as a guide and I believe that a move to manditory labeling would send the wrong signal.
Voluntary labeling is the best policy to give consumers a choice of foods without biotech ingredients, and will guide manufacturers in their efforts to label them accordingly without passing on the cost to the vast majority
of consumers who see no need for such regulation. If for religous or quasi-religous reasons some people object to biotech food let them pay the extra cost associated with this strange dietry requirement not the rest of us.