Methods of modern biotechnology now provide farmers and food producers with advanced tools to produce more healthful and better tasting food, as well as produce which resist attacks by insects and survives inclement weather conditions. Genetically modified food is really nothing new: farmers have long performed cross breeding of plants to provide improved products. But today's sophisticated science allows food producers to make alterations selectively and with precision.

Women should consider all the scientific evidence available, consult with their physician, and then decide whether they should take a chemopreventive agent to lower their risk of breast cancer, according to scientists with the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH). A new booklet, Chemoprevention of Breast Cancer, has been written for ACSH by Kathleen Meister, M.S.

To the Editor
The New England Journal of Medicine's apology for violating its own strict conflict-of-interest rules for reviews and editorials (news article, Feb. 24) prompts me to challenge the conventional wisdom of "the stricter the better."
Strict conflict-of-interest policies are themselves biased, since they suggest that researchers who work for drug companies are susceptible to introducing bias into a study, while government- and foundation-financed scientists never have an ax to grind.

A New York Times report ("Cleaning Up the Dry Cleaners" by Barnaby J. Feder, Feb. l5, 2000) raises questions about the health effects of the most widely used dry-cleaning chemical, perchloroethylene, commonly referred to as "perc." The article pointed out that there were substantial business efforts underway to develop safer alternatives to perc -- namely a biodegradable soap that dissolves in carbon dioxide.

Sales of organic foods have soared in recent years. They are touted as cleaner, more nutritious and better for the environment than foods produced by conventional means. But are such claims really true? People are finally starting to examine these questions.
On February 4, 2000, the ABC News show 20/20 presented a report about organic foods by John Stossel a report that asked these questions about cleanliness, nutritional value and environmental impact of organic versus conventionally-grown produce.

THE COVER-PAGE HEADLINE, "LEAD Poisoning: More Kids Are at Risk" is inconsistent with the data on childhood exposure to lead. Federal monitoring shows that blood lead levels fell significantly along with the decline in the use of leaded gasoline in the 1970s. The plaintiffs' lawyers are saying that it doesn't matter how much lead there is in the blood, just that there is some measurable amount and therefore the kids are sick. Such pronouncements indicate that we have left the realm of science and entered the theatrics of the courtroom.

Reporting about health risks isn't easy. It involves an understanding of the complexities of risk assessment, an ability to distinguish between scientific and pseudoscientific information, the capacity to evaluate and digest complicated material, and the communication skills to portray the risk in the proper context. Simplistic or contradictory messages can leave readers confused and wary; they "tune out" and you lose your audience.

Erratum: pg. 33, item number 3 reads, in part ...."should take supplements containing 400 mg of folic acid/day."

In recent months, many papers have carried articles and letters critical of meat (particularly beef), milk, and milk products. We are told to reduce or eliminate them from our diet to prevent or cure various diseases and environmental problems. But these prescriptions are scientifically invalid and won't achieve their touted goals. They are urged upon us despite the fact that nutritionists have recognized the exceptional dietary merits of meat and milk for over a century.