Sanet Post, Ronald Nigh
Re:Question for discussion
December 23, 1996

Dear Willie,

Unfortunately, science, as we know it, is not able to prove a non-effect. Health effects of this kind are studied statistically, in terms of risk, etc. If we have not detected an effect in the past we have no way of estimating its probability. To say "There is no scientific evidence to indicate adverse consequences on human health of X" is just another way of saying that science has nothing to say about the subject and that the opinions of scientists about the matter have the same value (or lack of value) as anyone else's opinion. It does not mean, as many people assume (and industry tries to imply) that science has "proved" that there are no adverse consequences. Such a proof is impossible.

The questions continue to be: are we willing to risk the possible but unknown adverse consequences of GMO in the environment? Are we ready to trust Monsanto et al. when they say that their scientists have "proved" that there is no risk? Perhaps another way of phrasing the question you are getting at is what would we accept as a demonstration that such risks are acceptable? Or that they are not? These are not easy questions to answer and seem to refer beyond themselves to questions of values, i.e. beyond the realm of scientific "proof."

Regards,
Ronald Nigh
Dana Association
Tel & FAX 529/678-7215