Genetically Modified Organisms

No subject is more heatedly discussed and debated in environmental circles these days than genetic engineering (GE), particularly of food crops. The federal government, through its Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee, has adopted a strong pro-GE stance. The Royal Society of Canada has published a critique of this position, specifically chastising the government for its close relationship with industry and its uncritical acceptance of industry views on this subject.

Meanwhile, the multinational corporate sector has mounted a $50 million advertising campaign to promote its GE products. The federal government, allying itself with grocery retailers and GE producers, has opted, through the Canadian General Standards Board (CGSB) for voluntary labelling of GE food. Meanwhile, grassroots public pressure for compulsory labelling is growing, and a Liberal private member's bill calling for mandatory labelling sits before the House of Commons.

Many scientists who approve unreservedly of GE food have links to corporate research funding, a fact which may affect their capacity for objectivity (as it has been shown to do in the area of pharmaceutical research). Others, such as Dr. Arpad Pusztai, formerly of the Rowett Research Institute in Scotland, have lost their livelihood as a result of cautionary comments about GE.

In this over-heated atmosphere, where enormous profits are sought and science can be subverted to profit, CAPE offers a Position Statement that, we believe, adequately reflects the 'precautionary principle', i.e. the notion that technology should be withheld from wide use until reasonable proof of its safety clearly exists.

About Us | Children's Health | Toxics | Greening Health Care | Climate Change
Regulatory Reform | Resources | Contact | Membership | Home