The American Soybean Association today announced support for the positive conclusions in the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Report entitled "Genetically Modified Pest Protected Plants: Science & Regulation," which said that biotechnology-enhanced foods are safe and that refinements to the regulatory process will improve public acceptance of these products.

"From ASA’s perspective, the report is an important step in reassuring consumers that our regulatory system is strong and that our biotechnology-enhanced crops are safe for humans and the environment," said ASA President Marc Curtis, a soybean producer from Leland, Miss. "During last fall’s FDA Hearings on biotechnology, ASA advocated that the government should assess the biotechnology review process to reassure consumers about the safety of agricultural biotechnology. By identifying ways that we can improve upon the safety and effectiveness of our present system, the NAS report supports the position that ASA advanced last fall."

According to Perry Adkisson, chancellor emeritus at Texas A & M University and the head of the National Academy of Sciences committee, public acceptance of these foods ultimately depends on the credibility of the testing and regulatory process.

Adkisson said that the federal agencies responsible for regulating transgenic plants have generally done a good job, but given the current level of public concern and following review of the data, it is the committee's belief that the agencies must bolster the mechanisms they use to protect human health and the environment. Adkisson also emphasized that the committee believes it is the properties of a genetically modified plant—not the process by which it was produced—that should be the focus of risk assessments.

The committee is not aware of any evidence suggesting that foods on the market today are unsafe to eat as a result of genetic modification. Furthermore, the committee found no strict distinction between the health and environmental risks posed by plants modified through modern genetic engineering techniques and those modified by conventional breeding practices. In other words, the breeding process is not the issue; it is the product that should be the focal point of regulation and public scrutiny.

The committee looked at the possibility that transgenic plants could inadvertently affect other organisms, for example, beneficial insects. As it turns out, both conventionally bred and transgenic pest-protected crops could impact these so-called non-target species, but the impact from these crops is likely to be smaller than that from chemical pesticides. In fact, according to the NAS report, when used in place of chemical pesticides, pest-protected crops could lead to greater biodiversity in some geographical areas. For that reason, the committee is calling for more research in this area.

At the core of these issues lies the federal system that regulates transgenic plants. The committee believes that generally the system is working well and identified areas where improvements are needed, including the following:

• EPA, USDA, and FDA should improve the coordination of their regulation process by identifying regulatory issues under the jurisdiction of each agency as well as issues for which more than one agency has responsibility and by establishing a process to ensure appropriate and timely exchange of information between agencies.
• Agencies should monitor ecological impacts of pest-protected crops on a long-term basis to detect any problems that may not have been predicted from tests conducted during the registration and approval process.
• Provide a more open and accessible regulatory process to help the public understand the benefits and risks associated with transgenic pest-protected plants.

Curtis said, "ASA is pleased to learn the committee has confidence that the current U.S. Coordinated Framework has been operating effectively for over a decade. Biotechnology holds great potential for improving our health and the environment, and ASA welcomes making improvements to a system that is already producing the world's safest food supply."