Jess PAULSON, Graduate Student, USA

I find fault with Mr. Yamashita's assertion that the ban on untested US beef was implemented by Japanese consumers. Japanese consumers do not set national trade policy. They may trust the Japanese government to impose regulations and standards for their safety, but a Japanese preference for tested or untested beef has not been established. The only way to do so would be to lift the government-imposed ban and monitor an un-manipulated market response.

The article urges that labeling is the appropriate answer to the BSE issue. Labeling, however, can be a means of discrimination by suggesting that a positive or negative label means the food is safe or unsafe regardless of scientific evidence. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have not yet been proven dangerous, but labeling of products as "GMO Free" give the impression that if the products is being advertised as free of it, then that it must be unhealthy.

The true answer to the issue rests in education. Japanese consumers may be more risk averse than their inernational counterparts, but they can only make responsible, safe decisions about food if they understand the actual dangers. Should a labeling system be coupled with a comprehensive education of the true risks of testing methods for BSE, a price discrepancy would develop between tested and untested beef. The result of this program would be that consumers would pay more for tested beef to appease their conscience. Consumers who choose untested beef would understand the risks and the savings involved.

Consumer preference is determined in the open market. A ban on imported beef prevents market forces from demonstrating the demand for, or rejection of, a product. Trade policy is determined by the government and the current ban on U.S. beef is a typical reaction of the Japanese officials to avoid demonstrating real leadership, not to protect Japanese consumers. Let the market determine what consumers want.