From: L. Ellison [llmmee@yahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2001 4:35 PM
To: fdadockets@oc.fda.gov
Subject: Docket 00N-1396 & Docket 00D-1598

Dear FDA,
How convenient that we do not have a name to address
or a person who will respond to us.  Unlike us you can
remain just a member of an organization and not feel
any individual accountablility to us. Despite
overwhelming public demand, the FDA has failed to
require health and ecological safety testing or
mandatory labeling, and thus puts public health and
environment at risk and deprives us of the right to
know or choose what we are eating. (Unless we choose
to eat organic which many of us do for fear that you
are not doing an adequate job protecting the food
supply.)
We understand that the proposed rules would again not
benefit the consumer as they do not require mandatory
pre-market safety testing, environmental review or
labeling of GE foods.  Further the new rules would
restrict voluntary labeling of non-GE foods.  Require
a mere letter of notification prior to the marketing
of a GE food.  Also the new rules fail to ensure
public access to adequate information for independent
review. These rules are supported by industry and
opposed by consumer groups.
Apparently, you need to hear from us again.
The FDA must require mandatory pre-market
conprehensive environmental review.  Unlike
conventional pollutants, which you have also failed to
protect us from, where a given amount of pollutant
causes a limited amount of damage, a small number of
mutant genes could have a population explosion and
reproduce forever, causing unlimited and irreparable
damage.
The FDA must require mandatory pr-market long-term
health testing.  GE products could be toxic, cause
allergic responses, have lower nutritional value, and
compromise immune responses in consumers.
The FDA must require mandatory labeling of GE
products. Without mandatory labeling, neither
consumers nor health professionals will know if an
allergic or toxic reaction was the result of a
genetically engineered food. Consumers would be
deprived of the critical knowledge needed to hold food
producers responsible should any of these novel
products be hazardous to pulic health.
Lastly, and I wish as a consumer that this was not
even an issue but it unfortunetely is.  The FDA, you,
must end the cozy relationship with the industries you
purport to be regulating.  People have been allowed to
work for a biotech company, then work for the FDA
writing the regulatory rules on that company's
product, then go back to working for the company! 
Ninty-two percent of FDA advisory committee meetings
had at least one conflict of interest.
We trust that you will consider our imput as consumers
paramount when you are making decisons regarding this
issue. In short, we hope that you will do the right
thing not only for us but our children and their
children not yet born and for yours as well.  
Sincerely,
Lynnea and Brian Ellison
Jack and Janet Ellison
Craig and Linda Ellison
Candice Ellison
John Mulkitten
Robert Helgren
Patricia Hornyak
Dahlia Ellison
Sarah Peller
Eric Ellison
Nicole Brozyk
Daphne Ellison
Lianne and Timothy Hay
Amber Pollina
Cody Higgins
Christine and Todd Dillingham
Stephanie Helgren
Paulette Helgren
BobbieSue and Thomas Marth

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text