Scientists Fret About Reaction
To Genetically Modified Crops

WASHINGTON —(AP)— Scientists worry that a public backlash against genetically modified foods could slow the development of crops that could improve health and nutrition.

Crops are in development that would be more nutritious than current varieties — rice enhanced with beta carotene, for example — or engineered to contain vaccines that would inoculate people in developing countries against disease.

``I hate to see a knee-jerk reaction and fear take away these possibilities,'' Michael Thomashow, a plant scientist at Michigan State University, told the House Science subcommittee on basic research.

Corn, soybeans and other crops that already are in wide use have been genetically engineered to resist insects and weed killers.

Scientists and farmers have been surprised by the growing public resistance to genetic engineering in Europe and to a lesser extent in Asia. The Clinton administration is under pressure from environmental activist groups to require labeling of foods that contain biotech ingredients.

Criticism of the technology has sharpened since a laboratory study at Cornell University found evidence that pollen from a genetically modified corn can kill larvae of the monarch butterfly. Following the study's release, the European Union agreed to tighten rules on trading and selling new genetically modified seeds.

Rebecca Goldburg, director of the Environmental Defense Fund's biotechnology program, claims there is good reason for consumers to be cautious.

Not enough research has been done to protect people with food allergies and to ensure that the crops won't damage the environment, she contends. She also said she thinks the benefits of the technology have been overstated.

``It does bear some risks,'' said Goldburg, the lone biotech critic among five scientists who appeared before the House panel on Tuesday. ``To go whole hog without stepping back and taking reasonable precautions would be a mistake,''

Backers of genetic engineering insist it isn't fundamentally different from traditional breeding, in which one plant might be cross-pollinated with a wild cousin to produce a hardier variety. Genetic engineering involves splicing a single gene from one organism to another one that often is unrelated.

A major concern of scientists is making sure the transplanted genes don't cause allergic reactions. Development of a new type of soybeans had to be stopped when it was discovered that some people might be allergic to them because they would have contained a gene from Brazil nuts.

A colleague of the Cornell researchers, entomologist Anthony Shelton, told the lawmakers that Europeans overreacted to the butterfly study.

``As scientists and policy makers we should not be so easily swayed by preliminary laboratory reports and the media,'' he said.

John Losey, the entomologist who led the study, acknowledged when it was released that more research was needed and said he believed the benefits of the corn outweighed the risk.

The so-called Bt corn is designed to produce a natural pesticide that kills the European corn borer.

(It also isn't eaten by the monarch butterfly caterpillar, meaning it can't "harm" the creature in anything but a laboratory setting where the larvae are essentially force-fed an alien diet. Media reports have consistently downplayed or ignored this salient point, because it negates the entire "study." But, like virtually all "preliminary research," the monarch butterfly "study" wasn't intended to answer any legitimate questions; it was intended to create a stir and generate more funding for the researchers. In this, it can be confidently assumed, it was highly successful. — Ed.)