From: T.L. Tollefson [tleet59@hotmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2001 1:59 PM
To: fdadockets@oc.fda.gov
Subject: Dockets .00N-1396 and 00D-1598 in consideration

As a person who has spent the last 20 years of my life as a vegetarian, I 
find one of the easiest ways to avoid foods that are not in my diet is to 
read food labels.  I find that the FDA's "No Labeling, No Safety Testing" 
Proposed Rules on Genetically Engineered Foods (Proposed Rules) is a way to 
keep the power of information from consumers -- your constituants.

This exclusionary policy is not consistant with free choice upon which all 
of our lives are founded.  Tobacco companies have been stung by the 
all-too-avoidable reality of their unpublished labeling truths.  Now 
consider this, tobacco is a product of choice.

Food is not a choice.  We all need it for survival.  We should all have the 
choice to make informed decisions when using food labels as a guide.  If the 
(Proposed Rules) are allowed to proceed, food labels become half-truths.  At 
which point, how can the validity of the remaining 'information' be 
considered credible?

I have no desire to eat, purchase, nor support producers and promoters of 
trans-species genetic engineering.  However, I am not stupid enough to 
realize my one voice will stop this process.  Yet, I do believe that my 
decisions based on knowledge allow me to make informed choices.  Please do 
not take away my informed decision-making process.

Therefore, I urge you to keep all genetically engineered ingredients
and crops off the market unless or until:

1) Independent safety testing demonstrates they have no harmful effects on 
human health or the environment;

2) They are labeled to ensure consumers¹ right-to-know; and

3) The biotechnology corporations that produce them are held
responsible for any harms they may cause.

I may be one small voice, but I speak volumes to the truth of fair and 
considerate commerce.

Lastly, I'd like to say how laughable "voluntary labeling" guidelines seem 
to me.  The fox guarding the henhouse comes to mind.  Need I say more?

Corporations have proven that the bottom line is what drives their 
decisions.  I do not want to eat vegetables with genetically engineered 
material from non-plant species simply because someone cares more about the 
corporate balance sheet than my choice as a citizen.  Better yet, I don't 
want to be the person with a food allergy that is mislead by lack of 
information on a food label.  What would that sort of law suit do to the 
bottom line or the company's reputation?

Please think about it.

Most sincerely,

Tammy L. Tollefson
W11860 County Road FF
River Falls  WI  54022

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com