June 2, 2000

Biotech concerns fight back

By Mike Barnett
Editor

Have you seen them?

I’m talking about the television ads promoting the benefits of biotechnology.

Here’s the text of one commercial: “A soybean crop yields a more bountiful harvest... A patient has the medicine she needs... A boy can survive a childhood disease... A cotton crop helps protect itself from certain pests... Because discoveries in biotechnology, from medicine to agriculture... Are helping doctors and farmers... To treat our sick, and protect our crops. An American farmer will produce a healthier grain... And an African farmer can provide better for his family... Because biotechnology researchers test and test, to find new solutions. Solutions that are improving lives today... Solutions that could improve our world tomorrow.” Fill in the appropriate feel-good images of farms, farm families, healthy children at play and some laboratory scenes, and you have what I think is a knockout commercial supporting the future of agriculture.

You bet. I said the future of agriculture. Like it or not, biotechnology is the answer to agriculture’s next “Green Revolution.” It is the technology that will help feed an ever-increasing world population and develop medicines that conquer disease.

All I can say for the commercials, backed by some $50 million by the Council For Biotechnology Information, is it’s about time. The Council—composed of major crop protection companies such as Aventis Crop- Science, BASF, Monsanto, Novartis, Zeneca Ag Products and others—have seen the handwriting on the wall with what’s happened in Europe. Scare tactics such as labeling biotech crops as “Frankenfoods” have been so effective that some say the biotech battle has been lost there for five to 10 years.

That European food phobia “spin” is gaining increasing attention in this country, and it’s starting to take its toll. There’s wide media coverage when U.S. baby food and cereal companies say “no” to biotech crops. The same holds true when activists dress as mutant veggie-animals to protest the use of the technology. All of this plays a part in shaping public perception. And it doesn’t matter how many times you hear it, it’s true: perception is reality.

Fortunately, polls show that U.S. citizens aren’t overly concerned about biotech-produced foods. At least, not yet. But those same polls show that their awareness of the issue has been raised dramatically from what it was in the not-so-distant past. And there’s where the danger lies. Minds are ripe to be swayed. They can be swayed by the truth. Or they can be swayed by wild claims and unfounded speculation.

That’s why it’s doubly important for the industry to become actively involved in the biotech debate. The Council is taking a number of steps to educate the public, including disseminating accurate information on biotechnology based on the best available science, published reports and expert opinion.

As part of their public information program, the council is also purchasing advertising and publishing consumer-oriented materials. Their web site, www.whybiotech.com, gives consumers a chance to learn about this important new science. And a toll-free consumer hotline (1-800-980-8660) will direct callers to a host of resources about biotechnology. All of this is on top of government efforts to assure the safety of biotech foods.

It’s distressing to see that the debate has already taken it’s toll on biotechnology. Farmers have cut back on planting biotech corn, soybeans and cotton this season. Who can blame them? With foreign markets rejecting the biotech crops, it becomes a pocketbook issue.

The raging debate over this new crop science, I hope, will boil down to facts. Activists have focused attention on the biotech risks, although they have no evidence available to support such claims. Ultimately, I believe the proof will be in the biotech pudding.

And that will be good for farmers and the world.