The Debate over Food Biotechnology in the United States: Is a Societal Consensus Achievable?

Science and Engineering Ethics

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 327-346

  Groth III, Edward ^a  

^a Consumers Union of U States Inc ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Agriculture; Biotechnology; Communication; Consensus; Food; Risks and benefits; Societal debate

Indexed keywords

PESTICIDE;

ARTICLE; BIOTECHNOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; FLUORIDATION; FOOD HANDLING; HUMAN; NUCLEAR ENERGY; RISK ASSESSMENT; UNITED STATES;

BIOTECHNOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; FLUORIDATION; FOOD TECHNOLOGY; HUMANS; NUCLEAR ENERGY; PESTICIDES; RISK ASSESSMENT; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0035403395     PISSN: 13533452     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11948-001-0057-z     Document Type: Article

References (111)

1. Eichenwald, K., Kolata, G. and Petersen, M. (2001) Biotechnology Food: From the Lab to a Debacle, New York Times, January 25, page A-1.
2. Molina, M. and Rowland, F.S. (1974) Stratospheric sink for chlorofluoromethanes: chlorine-atom catalyzed destruction of ozone. Nature 249: 810-814.
3. Schneider, S. (1989), Global Warming: Are We Entering the Greenhouse Century? Sierra Club Books, San Francisco.
4. Johnston, H.S. (1971) Reduction of stratospheric ozone by nitrogen oxide catalysts from SST exhaust, Science 173: 517-522. Also, National Research Council (1975) Environmental Impact of Stratospheric Flight, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.
5. Johnston, H.S. (1971) Reduction of stratospheric ozone by nitrogen oxide catalysts from SST exhaust, Science 173: 517-522. Also, National Research Council (1975) Environmental Impact of Stratospheric Flight, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.
6. National Research Council (1987) Drinking Water and Health, Vol. 7, Disinfectants and Disinfectant By-Products, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
7. National Research Council (1990) Health Effects of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR V), National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
8. Accumulation in breast milk discussed in Ehrlich, P.R., Ehrlich, A.H. and Holdren, J.P. (1977) Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment. W.H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco (pages 561-562). On global extent of pollution, see Risebrough, R.W., et al., (1976) Transfer of chlorinated biphenyls to Antarctica, Nature 264: 738-739.
9. Accumulation in breast milk discussed in Ehrlich, P.R., Ehrlich, A.H. and Holdren, J.P. (1977) Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment. W.H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco (pages 561-562). On global extent of pollution, see Risebrough, R.W., et al., (1976) Transfer of chlorinated biphenyls to Antarctica, Nature 264: 738-739.
10. See Patterson, C.C. (1980) An Alternative Perspective: Lead Pollution in the Human Environment: Origin, Extent and Significance. In: National Research Council (1980) Lead in the Human Environment, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.
11. See Patterson, C.C. (1980) An Alternative Perspective: Lead Pollution in the Human Environment: Origin, Extent and Significance. In: National Research Council (1980) Lead in the Human Environment, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.
12. Schneider, op. cit. (Note 3).
13. McNeil, D.R. (1957) The Fight for Fluoridation, Oxford University Press, New York.
14. Exner, F.B. and Waldbott, G.L. with Rorty, J. (ed.) (1957) The American Fluoridation Experiment, The Devin-Adair Company, New York.
15. Wollan, M. (1968) Controlling the Potential Hazards of Government-Sponsored Technology, George Washington Law Review 36(5): 1105-1137.
16. Groth, E. (1973) Two Issues of Science and Public Policy: Air Pollution Control in the San Francisco Bay Area, and Fluoridation of Community Water Supplies, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, California, May 1973.
17. McNeil, op. cit. (Note 10). The book is a history of fluoridation proponents' early struggles to overcome public opposition, told from the pro-fluoridation perspective.
18. Wollan, op. cit (Note 12), pp. 1128-29.
19. Groth, op. cit. (Note 13) reviews the literature, as do Exner et al., op. cit. (Note 11).
20. Groth, op. cit. (Note 13) reviews the literature, as do Exner et al., op. cit. (Note 11).
21. Waldbott, G.L., Burgstahler, A.W. and McKinney, H.L. (1978) Fluoridation: The Great Dilemma, Coronado Press, Lawrence, KS.
22. Wollan, op. cit, (Note 12), p. 1129.
23. Martin, B. (1991) Scientific Knowledge in Controversy: The Social Dynamics of the Fluoridation Debate, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY: ethical and legal issues raised by fluoridation are explored at pp. 30-34.
24. Wollan, op. cit. (note 12), pp. 1128-1130.
25. McNeil, op. cit. (Note 10), pp. 145-154.
26. Wollan, op. cit. (Note 12), pp. 1131-1133.
27. Wollan, op. cit. (Note 12), p. 1131. Groth, op. cit. (Note 13) and McNeil, op. cit. (Note 10) also reviewed the PHS lobbying campaign to gain endorsements.
28. Wollan, op. cit. (Note 12), p. 1131. Groth, op. cit. (Note 13) and McNeil, op. cit. (Note 10) also reviewed the PHS lobbying campaign to gain endorsements.
29. Wollan, op. cit. (Note 12), p. 1131. Groth, op. cit. (Note 13) and McNeil, op. cit. (Note 10) also reviewed the PHS lobbying campaign to gain endorsements.
30. McClure, F.J. (1970) Water Fluoridation: The Search and The Victory, National Institute of Dental Research, Bethesda, MD.: Chapter 14 details the endorsements.
31. McNeil, op. cit. (Note 10); McClure, op. cit. (Note 24).
32. McNeil, op. cit. (Note 10); McClure, op. cit. (Note 24).
33. See McClure, op. cit. (Note 24) for a summary of these studies, many of which he authored or co-authored; see Groth, op. cit. (Note 13) for a more critical review.
34. See McClure, op. cit. (Note 24) for a summary of these studies, many of which he authored or co-authored; see Groth, op. cit. (Note 13) for a more critical review.
35. The PHS began referring to fluoridation risk issues as "not debatable"; see Wollan, op. cit. (Note 12), p. 1133.
36. Pro-fluoridation scientists also refused to debate the evidence on risks and benefits in public with scientists critical of fluoridation. Panel discussions at major scientific meetings were set up to present only the pro-fluoridation perspective. Invitations to debate the evidence with opponents in communities where referenda were pending were rarely accepted. The effort by profluoridation advocates to avoid public debate of the scientific issues has been documented in detail by Waldbott et al., op. cit. (Note 17) and Martin, op. cit. (Note 19).
37. Pro-fluoridation scientists also refused to debate the evidence on risks and benefits in public with scientists critical of fluoridation. Panel discussions at major scientific meetings were set up to present only the pro-fluoridation perspective. Invitations to debate the evidence with opponents in communities where referenda were pending were rarely accepted. The effort by profluoridation advocates to avoid public debate of the scientific issues has been documented in detail by Waldbott et al., op. cit. (Note 17) and Martin, op. cit. (Note 19).
38. Exner et al., op. cit. (Note 11) presented a detailed and incisive scientific critique in 1957. Waldbott et al., op. cit. (Note 17) updated the critique in the 1970s.
39. Exner et al., op. cit. (Note 11) presented a detailed and incisive scientific critique in 1957. Waldbott et al., op. cit. (Note 17) updated the critique in the 1970s.
40. Groth, op. cit. (Note 13) reviewed the original studies and found most of Exner et al.'s criticisms valid.
41. Wollan, op. cit. (Note 12) and McNeil, op. cit. (Note 10) document both the stance taken by the pro-fluoridationists and the political context that gave rise to it.
42. Wollan, op. cit. (Note 12) and McNeil, op. cit. (Note 10) document both the stance taken by the pro-fluoridationists and the political context that gave rise to it.
43. McClure's book (Note 24) embodies the one-sided, closed-minded attitude towards the scientific evidence held by the PHS researchers.
44. Wollan, op. cit., discusses the PHS attitude toward research after 1950.
45. The American Dental Association, an early recruit to the pro-fluoridation effort, put out special issues of its Journal devoted entirely to promoting fluoridation. Articles included advice on organizing a local campaign, discrediting opponents, publicity and other political strategic issues.
46. Martin, op. cit. (Note 19) details how pro-fluoridation leaders made attacks on the credibility of opponents a keystone of their campaign. For examples of the kinds of information used to discredit anti leaders, see American Dental Association (1965) Comments on the Opponents of Fluoridation. Journal of the American Dental Assn. 71:1155-1183.
47. Martin, op. cit. (Note 19) details how pro-fluoridation leaders made attacks on the credibility of opponents a keystone of their campaign. For examples of the kinds of information used to discredit anti leaders, see American Dental Association (1965) Comments on the Opponents of Fluoridation. Journal of the American Dental Assn. 71:1155-1183.
48. McNeil, op. cit. (Note 10); Exner et al., op. cit. (Note 11).
49. McNeil, op. cit. (Note 10); Exner et al., op. cit. (Note 11).
50. Waldbott et al., op. cit. (Note 17), pp. 316-352.
51. Martin, op. cit. (Note 19) details numerous examples of professional reprisals taken against scientists who questioned fluoridation publicly (pp. 92-114).
52. Waldbott, a Detroit, MI, allergist who reported what he believed to be idiosyncratic reactions on the part of patients hyper-intolerant of fluoride, had difficulty publishing his reports in U.S. journals. He details several of the rejections - and the explicitly political reasons given for them - in Waldbott et al., op. cit. (Note 17), pp. 333-335.
53. Martin, op. cit. (Note 19) also explores the difficulty anti-fluoridation scientists have had in getting their views published in mainstream journals (pp. 97-99).
54. I myself had three manuscripts based on my doctoral dissertation (Note 13) rejected by U.S. public health journals in the 1970s. My reviews of the evidence on risks and benefits of fluoridation were sent to anonymous pro-fluoridation referees, who found them "biased". One editor advised that he wished to do nothing that might offer anti-fluoridationists any political leverage. Unlike Waldbott, who was an active political anti-fluoridation leader, I was politically outside the fray; my interest was exploring the interplay between political controversy and interpretations of scientific data. My papers were still rejected by several leading American journals in the 1970s, I believe because of a pervasive bias in favor of defending and promoting fluoridation.
55. Groth, E. (1991) The Fluoridation Controversy: Which Side Is Science On? A Commentary, in Martin, op. cit. (Note 19), pp. 169-192.
56. Martin, op. cit. (Note 19) reports that as of 1990, 121 million out of 212 million Americans served by public water supplies were drinking fluoridated water. The figure has held more or less steady at this level since about 1970 and probably has not changed appreciably since Martin's report.
57. For example, the Fluoride Action Network, an international coalition of organizations opposed to fluoridation, maintains a web site at http://www.fluoridealert.org.
58. Martin, op. cit. (Note 19), Appendix, Fluoridation around the world (pp. 193-217).
59. Holdren, J.P. (1992) The Transition to Costlier Energy, in: Schipper, L. and Myers, A.S. Eds., Energy Efficiency and Human Activity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
60. Walt Disney Studios produced a movie by that title, and subsequently published a book for young readers: Haber, H. (1956) The Walt Disney Story of Our Friend The Atom, Simon and Schuster, New York.
61. Gofman, J.W. and Tamplin, A. (1971) Poisoned Power, Rodale Press, Emmaus, PA.
62. Holdren, J.P. (1974) Hazards of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 30(8): 14-23.
63. Kendall, H.W. (1975) Nuclear Power Risks: A Review of the Report of the APS Study Group on Light Water Reactor Safety, Union of Concerned Scientists, Cambridge, MA.
64. Shapley, D. (1971) Plutonium: Reactor proliferation threatens a black market, Science 172: 143-146.
65. Balogh, B. (1991) Chain Reaction: Expert Debate and Public Participation in American Commercial Nuclear Power, 1945-1975, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
66. Nuclear Energy Policy Study Group (1977) Nuclear Power Issues and Choices, Ballinger, Cambridge, MA.
67. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1975), Reactor Safety Study. An Assessment of Accident Risks in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants. WASH-1400, NUREG-75 /014. Springfield, VA: National Technical Information Service.
68. Ehrlich, P.R., Ehrlich, A.H. and Holdren, J.P. (1977) Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment., W.H. Freeman, San Francisco. (History of the AEC/NRC discussed on page 404.)
69. Kemeny, J.G., Chairman (1979) Report of the President's Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island: The Need for Change: The Legacy of TMI, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
70. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (undated), Three Mile Island 2 Accident. A summary of the history and consequences of the TMI accident, available on the NRC web site at http://www.nrc.gov/OPA/gmo/tip/tmi.htm.
71. See Holdren (1992), op. cit. (Note 46).
72. Clark, S.L. (1991) Fight Global Warming, Environmental Defense Fund, New York.
73. Osteen, C. (1993) Pesticide Use Trends and Issues in the United States. Pp. 309-336 in, Pimentel, D. and Lehman, H., Eds. (1993) The Pesticide Question: Environment, Economics and Ethics, Chapman and Hall, New York.
74. Wargo, J. (1996) Our Children's Toxic Legacy: How Science and Law Fail to Protect Us From Pesticides, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. Wargo reports that by 1970, the USDA had registered more than 600 pesticide active ingredients and more than 60,000 formulated pesticide products.
75. Benbrook, C.M., Groth, E., Halloran, J.M., Hansen, M.K. and Marquardt, S. (1996) Pest Management at the Crossroads, Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., Yonkers, NY.
76. Ibid.; also Wargo, op. cit. (Note 61), pp. 67-71.
77. Ibid.; also Wargo, op. cit. (Note 61), pp. 67-71.
78. Ehrlich et al., op. cit. (Note 55), pp. 630-634.
79. Cooke, A.S. (1973) Shell-Thinning in Avian Eggs by Environmental Pollutants, Environmental Pollution 4: 85-157.
80. Carson, R. (1962) Silent Spring, Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
81. Graham, F., Jr. (1970) Since Silent Spring, Fawcett Crest, Greenwich, CT.
82. See Benbrook et al., op. cit. (Note 62), pp. 91-94, and Wargo, op. cit. (Note 61), pp. 88-103.
83. See Benbrook et al., op. cit. (Note 62), pp. 91-94, and Wargo, op. cit. (Note 61), pp. 88-103.
84. See Benbrook et al., op. cit. (Note 62), pp. 49-51, and Wargo, op. cit. (Note 61), pp. 148-149.
85. See Benbrook et al., op. cit. (Note 62), pp. 49-51, and Wargo, op. cit. (Note 61), pp. 148-149.
86. Ehrlich et al., op cit. (Note 55), Appendix 3, pp. 979-987. For detailed data on the comparative toxicity of different pesticides, see http://www.ecologic-ipm.com, a Consumers Union web site with extensive information on current pesticide policy issues.
87. National Research Council (1986) Pesticide Resistance: Strategies and Tactics for Management. National Academy Press,Washington, DC.
88. Pimentel, D., et al. (1993) Assessment of Environmental and Economic Impacts of Pesticide Use, pp. 47-84, in: Pimentel, D. and Lehman, H., Eds. (1993) The Pesticide Question: Environment, Economics and Ethics, Chapman and Hall, New York.
89. Ibid., p. 77.
90. Colborn, T., Dumanoski, D. and Myers, J.P. (1996) Our Stolen Future: How We Are Threatening Our Fertility, Intelligence and Survival - A Scientific Detective Story, Dutton, New York.
91. National Research Council (1999) Hormonally Active Agents in the Environment, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
92. National Research Council (1993) Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
93. Benbrook et al., op. cit. (Note 62), pp. 108-110.
94. Ibid. Also see, Kenney, J., Benbrook, C.M. and Groth, E. (1998) Worst First: High-Risk Insecticide Uses, Children's Foods, and Safer Alternatives, Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., Yonkers, NY. Go to http://www.ecologic-ipm.com/findings.html.
95. Ibid. Also see, Kenney, J., Benbrook, C.M. and Groth, E. (1998) Worst First: High-Risk Insecticide Uses, Children's Foods, and Safer Alternatives, Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., Yonkers, NY. Go to http://www.ecologic-ipm.com/findings.html.
96. Groth, E., Benbrook, C.M. and Goldberg, A. (2001) A Report Card for the EPA: Successes and Failures in Implementing the Food Quality Protection Act. Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., Yonkers, NY. Also available at web address in Note 78.
97. Ibid.
98. Benbrook et al., op. cit. (Note 62).
99. See Groth et al., op. cit. (Note 79). The FQPA requires the EPA to reassess all of the nearly 10,000 individual food/chemical tolerances (maximum legal residue limits) on the books as of 1996, and to adjust any that do not meet the law's strict new safety standard. The law gives EPA 10 years to carry out this work.
100. Benbrook et al., op. cit. (Note 62), pp. 112-122.
101. Slovic, P. (1987) Perception of Risk, Science 236: 280-285.
102. National Research Council (1996) Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
103. National Research Council (1989) Improving Risk Communication, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
104. Sandman, P.M. (1987) Risk Communication: Facing Public Outrage, EPA Journal, November 1987, pp. 21-22.
105. Eichenwald, et. al., op. cit. (Note 1), Numerous quotes from Monsanto managers who led the company's outreach efforts indicate clearly that their goal was to persuade the critics of crop biotechnology that Monsanto's view was correct. The effort failed at least partially because top management abandoned it, but whether it could have hoped to succeed is doubtful.
106. For an example of such outrage, much of it focused on issues related to genetically engineered foods, see, Rampton, S. and Stauber, J. (2001) Trust Us, We're Experts: How Industry Manipulates Science and Gambles With Your Future, Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putnam, New York.
107. Hartman, H. (1996) The Hartman Report: Food and the Environment: A Consumer's Perspective, The Hartman Group, Seattle, WA.
108. Eco-labeling of foods is discussed by Benbrook et al. (1996), op. cit. (Note 62), as an emerging market trend. Today, "green labels" on foods have proliferated and there are at least 100 different food eco-labels. The potential for consumer confusion over what the different labels mean, and whether claims of environmentally less harmful methods of production are credible, is large. Consumers Union, with the support of the Ford Foundation, has developed evaluations of different food eco-labels. Go to http://www.eco-labels.org.
109. Groth, E. (1999), remarks at a public hearing on genetically engineered foods, held by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Chicago, IL, November 18, 1999.
110. For detailed discussion of issues related to crop biotechnology and the food needs of developing countries, see http://www.cid.harvard.edu/cidbiotech/seminar/.
111. Final Report of the U.S.-EU Biotechnology Consultative Forum, December 2000. Available at http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/us/biotech/report.pdf.