The emergence of genetically engineered food has Oregon lawmakers
thinking twice about whether these products should be labeled in grocery
stores or even allowed in the state.
Genetic engineering occurs when the genetic structure of a living organism is altered, often to produce more desirable traits.
The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee held a public hearing this morning on four bills related to genetically engineered foods:
• House Bill 2530: prohibits importation, farming, cultivation, or importation of genetically engineered fish into the state.
• House Bill 2175 and House Bill 2532: requires foods that contain or produced using genetically engineered material be labeled on or after January 2014.
• House Bill 3177: requires signage in areas where genetically engineered fish are sold, displayed for sale or offered for human consumption on or after January 2014.
The hearing came a day after a number of national grocery chains including Whole Foods and Trader Joe’s announced they have agreed not to sell AquAdvantage Salmon, a genetically engineered fish that grow twice as fast as other salmon.
The fish is nearing approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which would make the first genetically altered animal approved for consumption.
Rep. Paul Holvey, D-Eugene, told lawmakers he’s concerned that genetically engineered fish could pose a threat to native Pacific salmon including spreading disease.
“This is too big of a risk for us to take to watch the native species of Pacific salmon potentially get decimated, which would trigger a whole series of impacts to the state of Oregon,” Holvey said.
Genetically engineered food should be labeled because consumers have the right to know what’s in the food they eat, he said.
While Holvey said the “jury is out” on whether genetically engineered foods are safe to eat, a scientist from the University of California-Davis disagreed.
“The science is not out on the safety of genetically engineered food. The science is definitely in,” said Dr. Alison L. Van Eenennaam, who specializes in Animal Genomics and Biotechnology at the University of California-Davis.
Genetically engineered food does not differ nutritionally and in its characteristics from other foods, which is why the FDA does not mandate a label on those products, she noted.
There were also legal concerns raised about whether labeling genetically engineered foods and barring certain fish would violate the Constitution, including free speech and interstate commerce.
The Chairman of the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee Rep. Brad Witt, D-Clatskanie, said he will be awaiting a formal opinion from Legislative Counsel on those questions before moving forward with the bills.
qwong@statesmanjournal.com, (503) 399-6694 or follow at twitter.com/QWongSJ.
Genetic engineering occurs when the genetic structure of a living organism is altered, often to produce more desirable traits.
The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee held a public hearing this morning on four bills related to genetically engineered foods:
• House Bill 2530: prohibits importation, farming, cultivation, or importation of genetically engineered fish into the state.
• House Bill 2175 and House Bill 2532: requires foods that contain or produced using genetically engineered material be labeled on or after January 2014.
• House Bill 3177: requires signage in areas where genetically engineered fish are sold, displayed for sale or offered for human consumption on or after January 2014.
The hearing came a day after a number of national grocery chains including Whole Foods and Trader Joe’s announced they have agreed not to sell AquAdvantage Salmon, a genetically engineered fish that grow twice as fast as other salmon.
The fish is nearing approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which would make the first genetically altered animal approved for consumption.
Rep. Paul Holvey, D-Eugene, told lawmakers he’s concerned that genetically engineered fish could pose a threat to native Pacific salmon including spreading disease.
“This is too big of a risk for us to take to watch the native species of Pacific salmon potentially get decimated, which would trigger a whole series of impacts to the state of Oregon,” Holvey said.
Genetically engineered food should be labeled because consumers have the right to know what’s in the food they eat, he said.
While Holvey said the “jury is out” on whether genetically engineered foods are safe to eat, a scientist from the University of California-Davis disagreed.
“The science is not out on the safety of genetically engineered food. The science is definitely in,” said Dr. Alison L. Van Eenennaam, who specializes in Animal Genomics and Biotechnology at the University of California-Davis.
Genetically engineered food does not differ nutritionally and in its characteristics from other foods, which is why the FDA does not mandate a label on those products, she noted.
There were also legal concerns raised about whether labeling genetically engineered foods and barring certain fish would violate the Constitution, including free speech and interstate commerce.
The Chairman of the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee Rep. Brad Witt, D-Clatskanie, said he will be awaiting a formal opinion from Legislative Counsel on those questions before moving forward with the bills.
qwong@statesmanjournal.com, (503) 399-6694 or follow at twitter.com/QWongSJ.
No comments:
Post a Comment