In the aftermath of Ottawa’s rejection of Monsanto’s bid to market a dairy growth hormone product, biotechnology supporters were divided last week over whether the decision sent a negative signal to biotech companies about how their products will be judged.
George Fleischmann, president of the economically powerful Food and Consumer Products Manufacturers of Canada, said Canada risks being seen as anti-science by international investors.
“The decision was taken for emotional and political reasons, not science,” he said. “I am saddened by the decision. It sends a very negative signal south of the border.”
Read Also
Interest in biological crop inputs continues to grow
It was only a few years ago that interest in alternative methods such as biologicals to boost a crop’s nutrient…
Kempton Matte, president of the dairy processor’s lobby National Dairy Council of Canada, reached the opposite conclusion.
He said the decision was specific to milk and not a broader message about how Canada’s regulators will judge other products.
The council opposed introduction of bovine somatotropin, which boosts milk production in cows, arguing it could produce a consumer backlash that would scare away hundreds of millions of dollars in dairy product sales.
“I have heard the arguments but I don’t think this will have a long-term impact on biotech,” Matte said. “I think there was a lot of consumer unease about a specific product and we are talking milk here.”
He said the dairy industry looks forward to the benefits of other products of biotechnology, but a production-enhancing drug is not one of them.
“I don’t think this decision is a scar on agriculture biotech at all.”
Joyce Groote, president of the biotech-promoting BIOTECanada said the BST decision was “disappointing” because of the nine years it took and the uncertainty it created. “I feel a lot of sympathy for Monsanto.”
But she said federal regulators in Health Canada’s health protection branch have approved many genetically modified products, including corn and canola.
“I really don’t think it is a more general signal,” she said.
Fleischmann argued it was a policy-making fiasco, which exposed flaws in the approval system. He said the health protection branch must be revamped to “make sure this never happens again.”
