June 28, 1990
Dear Mr. Bazan:
I write to comment on your letter to me of May 24. You and I probably agree about the fact that the BGH issue is not simply a scientific issue. I understand very well the economic issues you raise and believe that they are legitimate questions. However, that does not give us license to manipulate the scientific questions in order to deal with the economic ones. And this is where I part company from Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream and from some of the views in your letter. It is not appropriate to misstate or misinterpret the science in order to accomplish a political aim dictated by economic considerations. By doing so, one severely inhibits the possibility that rational policy can be made. Rather, one must conduct a debate in which honest consideration of all the questions is made. In the present case, my problem is summed up in your sentence "consumers do not want still another "chemical" in their diet". Consumers should recognize that their entire diets are
"chemicals". Careful attention should be paid in the present case to data about the amount of BGH over and above that which normally occurs in milk that appears in treated cows. Also, one must pay attention to whether the BGH in milk does  influence the well-being of the consumer's health. In fact, answers are not yet complete on some of these questions. Therefore it is irresponsible to argue that treatment of cows with BGH has any untoward effect on human health. Being able to make such distinctions is what scientific literacy is all about.
Sincerely,
Maxine F. Singer
cc: Father James Salmon