|
|
|
Press Release |
Contact: |
YONKERS, NY, June 30, 1999: Consumers Union, publisher of
Consumer Reports, praised a decision today by the U.N.'s main
food safety body, the Codex Alimentarius Commission, not to endorse
the safety of recombinant bovine growth hormone (rbGH), a
genetically-engineered hormone produced by Monsanto that is designed
to increase dairy cows' milk output.
Codex officially agreed to shelve any further discussion of a
U.S.-backed proposal to set a Maximum Residue Level for rbGH--known
as bovine somatropin (BST) in Europe--in milk in light of vigorous
opposition from other nations that still question the hormone's
safety. By indefinitely shelving the proposal, Codex acknowledged the
deep division between countries such as the U.S., that insist rbGH is
safe and countries like those of the European Union, where rbGH has
not been approved due to nagging safety concerns.
"By refusing to set a standard today, Codex has recognized that
there is no consensus on rbGH safety in the international scientific
community, and that national governments should be able to decide
whether rbGH should be permitted in their milk supply," said Jean
Halloran, Director of the Consumer Policy Institute at Consumers
Union.
The U.S. has pushed Codex to adopt a standard to ensure the
continued export of its dairy products from cows treated with the
rbGH drug. However, U.S.-driven efforts to persuade the international
community that rbGH is safe have been blocked twice before at Codex,
in 1995 and again in 1997, primarily by opposition from European
governments.
Today's action by Codex leaves the door open for countries to
exclude dairy imports treated with the hormone. While rbGH is not yet
the subject of a trade dispute like the one currently pending on
hormones used on beef cattle, it could erupt as a future trade
issue.
In countries where rbGH is legal, including the U.S., Mexico, and
South Africa, the hormone is injected into dairy cows to raise milk
production. In the U.S., where rbGH use has been approved since 1993,
the government has repeatedly argued that the hormone's use poses no
significant risks to public health, and that its risks to the health
of dairy cattle are "manageable."
However the controversial hormone has been banned in Canada and
its use is subject to a moratorium the European Union. The EU has
already issued two detailed scientific reports raising questions
about human and animal health issues that arise when the hormone is
used, and will decide at the end of 1999 whether to continue its
current moratorium. Canada banned the hormone in January on grounds
of its effects on the health of dairy cows, because cows treated with
rbGH are more likely to contract udder infections which are treated
with antibiotics.
Consumers Union advocates labeling dairy products from
rbGH-treated cows. Today at the Codex meeting, the U.S. acknowledged
that consumers in many countries oppose rbGH use because of possible
public health impacts, animal welfare concerns, or both. The U.S. has
argued in written comments to Codex that milk and dairy products can
be labeled at the national level to address these consumer
concerns.
"We are gratified that the international food safety process has
held out for a higher degree of consumer protection than the U.S.
thinks is necessary," said CU's Jean Halloran. She added, "Consumers
around the world should thank the Codex Commission for its common
sense. And Consumers in the U.S. will most likely want to start a
dialogue with our government to explore labeling as one way to
address consumer concerns about rbGH."
Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports,
is an independent, nonprofit testing and information-gathering
organization, serving only the consumer. We are a comprehensive
source of unbiased advice about products and services, personal
finance, health, nutrition, and other consumer concerns. Since 1936,
our mission has been to test products, inform the public, and protect
consumers.
