Docket Management
Docket: 00N-1396 - Premarket Notice Concerning Bioengineered Foods
Comment Number: EC -80

Accepted - Volume 17

Comment Record
Commentor Mr. Adam Day Date/Time 2001-02-16 23:05:44
Organization Brown University
Category Academic

Comments for FDA General
Questions
1. General Comments As history has shown, we consistency underestimate our effect upon the world. The least we can do in this case is to offer those of us who believe something like Bioengineered foods to be harmful to the human body the opportunity to avoid them. Asbestos paint, mercury tooth fillings, chorophlorocarbons in hairspray: give those of us with the foresight to deem these things hazardous the chance to save our own bodies at the very least. To claim that bioengineered foods are not hazardous is one thing; to make that claim in the face of contestation and not recognize that opposition is to contradict the very notion of freedom that this country espouses. If it is necessary to display the ingredients, it must be equally necessary to display what has not been proven exempt from the content of the food. And if there truly is no difference between natural and bioengineered food, why is there this movement to erase the difference in the minds of the public? If bioengineered food is truly the same as natural, then the proponents of bioengineering should worry less about premarket notice, as it should signifiy nothing to them.




EC -80