ÐÓ°ÉÔ­´´

THE contrast could hardly be starker. Two years ago, when biochemist Arpad
Pusztai claimed on British television that genetically modified potatoes harmed
rats, all hell broke loose. The reaction across the country was little short of
hysterical.

Then, last month, American consumers learned that they might have eaten taco
shells containing genetically modified maize that had not been approved for
human consumption. Did they boycott Mexican food? Did they picket supermarkets?
No. While a few green pressure groups tried to turn the drama into a crisis,
indifference ruled from coast to coast.

These events reveal the transatlantic gulf in attitudes to genetically
modified foods. It is a cultural curiosity, and so far a pretty harmless one.
But there is one difference between European and American attitudes that does
give cause for concern.

Pusztai worked on rats, with potatoes that were never intended for people to
eat and his methods have been widely criticised. Looked at this way, the British
public overreacted. By comparison, the Americans under-reacted.

That’s not to suggest there’s any evidence that the tacos’ unwanted
ingredient—StarLink maize—will harm anyone. The US Environmental
Protection Agency withheld full approval only because there is no way yet to
prove that the protein added to StarLink won’t produce an allergic reaction in
humans. The alarming feature of the case is that it reveals the utter inadequacy
of controls meant to keep crops such as StarLink separate from those destined
for our tables.

Up to now, this has not been a problem, because almost all modified plants on
the market have been food crops. But the next generation of modified crops is
going to be different. Biotech companies dream of creating plants that produce
everything from drugs and plastics to biofuels. The predicament facing the food
industry is that a banana containing a potent drug is likely to look the same as
the banana in your packed lunch.

Many green activists will be delighted that the StarLink case could delay the
introduction of such products
(see p 6)
and deal a blow to biotech companies’ profits. But they would do
well to reflect on the possible benefits of these
modified plants. Can we afford to reject a technology that could deliver cheap
vaccines and medicines, and help wean the world off fossil fuels?

In the field, there will have to be strict controls to stop strains modified
to make raw materials for industry from cross-pollinating food plants. And
segregation will have to be enforced at mills and other places where crops are
collected. But there’s nothing new here. Already poisonous varieties of oilseed
rape destined for industry are kept separate from edible varieties.

Above all, food companies must take responsibility for the ingredients they
use. Why was it left to Friends of the Earth to commission the tests that found
StarLink in taco shells? The food industry needs to get its act together before
the new generation of modified plants arrives. Next time, the consequences could
be serious. Then even Americans might lose their taste for genetic engineering.