Protect Our Food logo


> Sign the USDA Petition
> Background Information
> UCS Position Paper
> Position Paper Q&A
> Protect Our Food Home
> F & E Home

UCS Comments
>Proposed Regulation of GE Organisms, June 2009
>Proposed Regulation of GE Organisms, November 2008
>Syngenta Ethanol Corn
>USDA Environmental Impact Statement
>Kansas Pharma Rice
>Washington Pharma Safflower

Related Features
>Sensible Pharma Crops Slideshow
>Pharma/Industrial Crops in Your State
>Pharma/Industrial Crop Substances
>How Can Contamination Occur?
>Commercial Pharma Crop Products
>"Safe" Levels of Drugs in Food?

Related UCS Reports
>The Economics of Pharmaceutical Crops
>A Growing Concern

News
>USDA Proposed Changes to GE Oversight
>Rice Report Shows Contamination Risk
>Food Industry on Pharma/Industrial Crops
>Companies Ramp up Pharma Production
>Lax Oversight of Pharma/Industrial Crops


 

Imagine food crops genetically engineered to produce drugs
and industrial chemicals.

Now imagine them mixed in with your food.

Drug and biotechnology companies are engineering food crops to produce pharmaceutical and industrial chemicals, and they are growing these crops outdoors, often in food-producing regions. UCS analysis and independent experts agree on the danger: “pharma” food crops such as rice, corn, and soybeans are very likely to contaminate the food supply with drugs and industrial chemicals that potentially pose serious human health risks.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has the power to protect our food, but to date the department has exhibited a poor record—including lax regulations, weak enforcement, and a lack of public accountability—overseeing the outdoor use of pharma crops.

The food industry, farming and public health organizations, and many others have joined UCS in calling for a ban on the outdoor production of pharma food crops.

Still, in spite of these warnings and known risks, a USDA proposal could further weaken the oversight of pharma crops. Moreover, unlike the ban UCS recommended, these rules provide no incentives for cutting-edge alternatives that are safer for the food supply. Thanks to thousands of letters sent by UCS supporters and others, the USDA was forced to twice extend the comment period on this proposal, which ended on June 29, 2009. We are currently waiting to hear about the outcome of the USDA proposal. Click here to read UCS' in-depth comments and analysis on this proposal.