Editorial Notebook: The Sweeter Side of 'Frankenfoods'

Wait--put down that sandwich. Do you really know what you're eating? That could have mutant food in it! That's right, dining hall food could indeed be made from mutant food. Who wouldn't be afraid of mutant food? The nondescript terms used to describe it--names including "engineered" and "altered"--conjure images of cows with two heads and mutant killer tomatoes. Common sense and popular stereotyping suggest that fluorescent puddles of green goo and nuclear power plants create these atrocities; Homer Simpson has certainly created tons of "altered" food through his various accidents over the years.

But the reality of genetically improved foods is far more benign. Whether you know it or not, so-called biotech foods have already been incorporated into the food we eat on a daily basis. Half of the U.S. soybean crop is already genetically altered, and a quarter of the corn planted has been engineered. These crops are used routinely by large companies that manufacture products served in Harvard's dining halls.

Rest assured, however. The government intends to step up scrutiny on this controversial area of science. Yesterday, the Clinton administration announced new regulations by the Food and Drug Administration to test the use of these high-tech foods. By and large, these measures are designed less to scrutinize these products than they are to assuage the fears of a growing percentage of the population.

There has been a recent resurgence of protest over the use of genetically advanced food. In Europe, protesters have threatened to boycott American produce, and many foreign supermarkets have acquiesced to this sentiment by no longer carrying the food. Hundreds of protestors attended a conference at The Hague earlier this year, dressing up as mutilated animals and chanting "Frankenfood."

These protests have been largely based on misinformation about the practice of genetically engineering food products. Despite our instinctive fear of unknown, mutant food monsters, most of the endeavors to scientifically improve food have made crops hardier or more nutritious. Scientists have developed strains of corn that have built-in pesticides, for example, and others have developed a strain of rice that is rich in Vitamin E.

These new inventions have improved and will continue to improve the method of food production in the U.S. and around the world. At a time in history where the food supply is already inadequate to feed the exploding world population, these new crops and animals are desperately needed. They will feed more people in more nutritious ways, and as a result, they will save many lives.

But the research and experimentation with this new supply should not go unchecked. It is certainly a dangerous endeavor, with potentially serious consequences to the environment and to us. Clinton's new regulations will go a long way to supervise the development of this emerging field, requiring all newly created genetically altered food to be documented with the FDA four months before their release to the public. Scientists at the FDA who will regulate the crops' use will examine the research and decide accordingly.

More importantly, the plan certifies the use of certain scientific tests to detect the presence of biotech improvements in foods. These tests would be used in food labeled biotech free, to ensure uniformity in quality. Those who are afraid of the new technology will have the option to eat unaltered food, and research with genetically altered food can continue until it is proved sufficiently safe. And even the most skeptical will no longer have to worry about being eaten alive by killer tomato catsup. Now that's food for thought.