The world according to Monsanto : pollution, corruption, and

160 the world according to monsantolength the grounds for the FDA policy statement, he concluded his statementwith this: “FDA takes seriously its mandate to protect consumers inthe United States and to ensure that the United States’ food supply continuesto be one of the safest in the world. ...We are confident that our approachis appropriate. It allows us to ensure the safety of new food productsand . . . it gives manufacturers the ability to produce better products andprovide consumers additional choices.”“Maryanski’s other role was to smooth over differences inside the FDA, ifnecessary by stifling dissident voices with the support of Michael Taylor,”Druker went on, showing me another declassified document that his organizationhad put online. This was a letter dated October 7, 1991, from thebiotechnology coordinator to the deputy commissioner for policy, whichcontained the following: “Suggest that you consider discussing your goals fordeveloping our food biotechnology policy by the end of the year with Dr.Guest, CVM. Most crops developed by the new biotechnology that will beused for human foods will also be used as feed for animals. ...I think CVMwould appreciate hearing your thoughts.” 19 Maryanski was obviously puttingTaylor forward to stifle the rebellion that was brewing in the Center for VeterinaryMedicine. The document also shows that Michael Taylor, the formerMonsanto lawyer, was the person who determined the purposes of the regulationthat was then being drafted.“Michael Taylor was Monsanto’s man at the FDA, which hired himspecifically to supervise the regulation of GMOs and created the position forthat purpose,” said Druker. “The declassified documents reveal that heworked to empty the policy statement of any scientific substance, whichcaused a good deal of discontent on the staff.”During my lengthy recorded telephone conversation with the formerMonsanto vice president, he persistently denied any direct involvement inthe preparation of the policy statement: “That’s false. I wasn’t the authorof the policy. I was the deputy commissioner for policy who oversaw theprocess. But the policy was developed by the FDA’s professional careerpeople based on the law and the science.”When I reported these words to Michael Hansen, he literally jumped outof his chair and pulled out a document published in 1990 by the InternationalFood Biotechnology Council (IFBC). This ephemeral body was setup in 1988 by the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), well known