Monsanto executives have a history of taking positions within the FDA. Isn't that considered unethical and a conflict of interest?

Expert response from Community Manager

Moderator for GMOAnswers.com

Thursday, 31/10/2013 14:41

We actually just posted two responses on this topic which are available via the links below:

• Was Michael Taylor the Deputy Czar of the FDA a VP at Monsanto? Answered by Stephanie Regagnon, director of sustainable ag portfolio strategy at Monsanto
• Why is ex Monsanto executive Michael Taylor the head of the FDA??? Can you say conflict of interest? Answered by Cathleen Enright, executive director of the Council for Biotechnology Information

A passage from Enright’s response reads:

"Opponents of biotechnology often raise the fact that some former EPA, FDA and USDA employees have gone to work for biotech companies, and some company employees have left to take jobs in the public sector. It is important to note that agricultural biotechnology is a specialized field that requires knowledge in science, risk assessment and public policy, and both the public and private sectors benefit when employers have access to the most competent and experienced people.

"Furthermore, the Obama Administration has issued a policy statement making it clear that political appointees are not to interfere in scientific research. The policy states:

'The overriding intent of this policy is that political appointees must not exert undue influence over scientists in the conduct of scientific research. Recognizing that the nature of the scientific inquiry includes formulating and exploring questions, it is to be expected that scientists may have different perspectives and develop multiple approaches in their research. The existence of disputes in research is not inconsistent with scientific integrity or with a policy that political appointees must not exercise undue influence over scientific inquiry.'

"As a former federal regulator, I was honored to serve with individuals from the private sector, who brought to their positions not only the expertise needed to make regulatory decisions based on the actual risk presented using the best scientific information available, but also a moral center that never confused their duties in their regulatory positions with their roles in jobs they previously held."

If you have additional questions after reading this, please ask.