Q. What exactly is a Genetically
Modified (GM) crop ?
A gene is an instruction and each of our cells contains tens of thousands
of these instructions. In human beings, these genes/instructions work
together to determine everything, from the colour of our hair or eyes
to our predisposition to any kind of disease. We all have slightly
different characteristics (even from our brothers or sisters), which
can be explained by the fact that our parents' genes get shuffled about
at random before we are born.
This is also true for plants. A farmer or gardener may save seed from
a plant he likes, hoping that it may deliver an identical plant. However,
as genes are shuffled about, he is likely to get something that looks
rather different in shape, for example, or in colour.
Farmers have selected plants with the characteristics they want for
thousands of years : they would select plants with extra seeds in
a pod or with the ability to survive in the cold. By crossing the
best plants, they hoped to produce even better varieties. But this
was very much a trial and error process, very slow, wasteful and inefficient:
you hit the jackpot only very occasionaly. This has changed since
the 1950s, when plant scientists intervened.
These scientists knew that deliberately exposing plant seeds to radiation,
for instance, increased the chance that one of them might produce
a more useful plant. It soon became apparent that GM techniques allow
specific genes to be copied into a plant.
As scientists today know a great deal about the genes they are working
with, it is easier for them to 'track' the genes, understand their
effects and eliminate unwanted side-effects long before the plants
are used in field trials or grown commercially.
Q. Are you not trying to 'play
God' ? Isn't it wrong to interfere with nature ?
We do not feel inclined to start a philosophical or theological
discussion here. However, isn't there a point in suggesting that
man is only using the gifts the Creator endowed him with ?
Furthermore, all successes in biotechnology will not prevent Nature
from being in charge. Genes can only be inserted into plants successfully
if Nature agrees. Otherwise the plant is unlikely to survive and
certainly will not reproduce .
Q. What happens when genes are
inserted ?
Are we really in control ? It is not possible to control the exact
point within the plant's own genes where a copied gene is inserted.
The location of the gene is important because it affects how it
will work. It may not work at all or it may affect other processes
taking place in the plant.
All of this is explored in the laboratory. Only after years of testing,
when scientists are confident of their laboratory results, does
a GM plant get to the field trial stage.
Compared with conventional methods, where thousands of genes are
crossed at once, GM techniques are far more precise. In fact, conventional
methods can and do sometimes go wrong: a potato, for example, bred
in the conventional way in the 1950s contained more of its natural
poisons than normal and killed several people. Because of the rigorous
testing of GM crops, this would be spotted and the crop would be
withdrawn at the laboratory stage .
Q. What about safety of foods
produced using biotechnology ?
Before any GM foods (or processed food products with GM ingredients)
are approved for commercialisation in the European Union, they are
tested rigorously by independent expert committees. These bodies
approve a new GM food only when they are completely satisfied that
it is as safe as its conventional counterpart. Similar safety assessment
mechanisms exist in other parts of the world. In fact, many millions
of people have been eating GM foods for over five years now and
there are no reports of adverse effects on health. Nor is there
any evidence that GM foods fed to animals do them any harm or harm
the humans who eat them. While there is no such thing as 'zero risk'
for any food, consumers can be confident that foods produced using
biotechnology meet the most stringent food safety standards. Biotechnology
is one of the most extensively researched and reviewed agricultural
developments ever .
Q. What about the impact of GM
crops on the environment ?
Biotechnology is a key element in sustainable agriculture that
will benefit the environment. Benefits include more targeted delivery
of insecticides, ability to use more environmentally sustainable
farm practices, water and soil conservation and greater safety for
workers and the ecosystem.
Many crops -including tomatoes, potatoes, maize and cotton- now
have the internal ability to repel insects. Genetically enhanced
maize will improve the efficiency of feed use by livestock and minimize
the pollution problems associated with animal waste. Finally, the
ability to obtain greater crop yield from existing land decreases
the need to convert forests to farmland. All of these environmental
benefits are possible because of biotechnology .
Q. Do GM crops affect
biodiversity in the countryside ?
GM crops very often have a positive effect on biodiversity : they
allow for more environmentally friendly practices compared with
conventional farming methods. Just two examples :
In the United States, genetically enhanced cotton uses up to 85
per cent less insecticide than conventional cotton. That is 85 per
cent less insecticide to pollute rivers, leave residues in the soil
and affect harmless insects.
To date, there are hardly any commercial crops in Europe, but GM
sugar beet trials in Britain show that it can reduce total herbicide
use by about 30 per cent. As a result, weeds can be left for longer
before they are controlled which is good for diversity because weeds
are a source of food for insects and birds. GM crops are already
enabling farmers in other parts of the world to grow high quality
crops with less environmental impact and more opportunities to encourage
wildlife .
Q. What are the benefits of biotechnology
for consumers ?
Products will provide consumer benefits such as enhanced flavour
and freshness, improved nutritional value and reduced saturated
fat content.
Biotech also offers indirect, but nevertheless genuine consumer
benefits : more pest management choices for farmers and more sustainable
tillage practices to protect valuable topsoil. For developing countries
biotechnology can increase yields, thereby helping to address food
shortages and hunger.
In time, biotechnology may produce : biodegradable packaging ; alternatives
to chemical pharmaceuticals ; more healthful food products (e.g.
vegetables with increased quantities of antioxidants to reduce the
risk of cancer ; fruits as a delivery medium of vaccines for diseases
that devastate Third World populations).
Q. Why are there no clear labels
on GM foods, to help the consumer in making an informed choice ?
We support efforts to ensure that consumers have the information
they need to make sound food decisions, in other terms that they
have an informed choice. The EU Novel Foods Directive makes labelling
of GM foods, i.e. Novel Foods, mandatory.
The revised EU Directive 90/220 provides for stringent labelling
provisions, requiring labelling at all stages of the placing on
the market of GMOs. In some countries retailers and manufacturers
had agreed to a voluntary labelling scheme for GM products already
years ago.
In Britain, GM tomato paste used to be clearly labelled and sold
very well. Since then new regulations have been introduced, requiring
that all foods containing GM ingredients (over a 1 per cent threshold)
have to be labelled. It is therefore likely that the consumer will
progressively discover more labelled products on the shelves of
shops and supermarkets .
Q. Aren't many people worried
about new allergies through GM foods ?
New GM foods are tested extensively for possible allergic reactions.
There is already an example which proves that this testing is really
effective An experimental GM soya variety contained a gene from
Brazil nuts which made the soya potentially allergenic.
This problem was identified, and the development of the soya stopped,
long before it got anywhere near the market place. In the future,
GM may be used to produce non-allergenic nuts. There is already
research underway to produce non-allergenic rice .
Q.Couldn't GM crops resisting
pests, weeds and disease, lead to the development of super weeds?
Farmers in the USA, Argentina, Canada, and a growing number of
countries around the world have widely adopted crops improved through
biotechnology because they provide them with another tool to help
control insects and weeds that can damage crops or decrease productivity.
Crops currently in the market place have undergone thorough testing
in the field and have passed strict environmental regulation criteria.
It is also worth noting that resistance to products used to control
pests is an issue with which farmers have been dealing long before
the introduction of crops developed using biotechnology. That is
why the principles of Integrated Crop Management (ICM) are being
increasingly adopted by farmers world wide. ICM is designed to prevent
the weeds and insects from becoming immune to control. Farmers rotate
both crops and herbicides to minimize the chances of tolerance.
So, with GM, farmers can still protect their crops but with fewer
chemicals and with no added risk of tolerance.
Insect pests could become resistant to GM plants just as they do
to insecticides. For this reason, where GM insect-resistant crops
are grown, there are strict regulations, backed up by frequent inspections,
to ensure that non GM 'refuge areas' are established within the
crops to reduce or prevent the development of resistance .
Q. What about cross-pollination
? In other words: what effects do GM crops have on nearby plants?
Our opponents claim that GM plants cross-pollinate other crops
and wild plants. Pollen from a GM crop might come into contact with
nearby plants and weeds (but not with other crops because of the
'buffer zones'). However, for cross-pollination to be successful,
plants would have to be compatible and flowering at the same time.
The nearest wild relatives that GM maize could cross with are more
than 6000 kilometers away across the Atlantic Ocean. Sugarbeet is
harvested before it flowers and so before it sheds any pollen. Before
any GM crop is planted in the open (for the EU : to date exclusively
on trial fields), the likelihood of cross-pollination is carefully
assessed . Every GM crop has been tested for years in laboratories
as well as in greenhouses. They are not just plonked outside without
any thought ! As for GM oilseed rape (canola) there is very little
chance that it will cross-pollinate other oilseed rape crops because
its pollen is heavy and sticky and does not travel too far from
the crop itself. Research in France has shown that 97.5 per cent
of pollen falls to the ground within 1 metre of the edge of the
field and 99.8 per cent within less than 25 metres.. Nor does pollen
spread necessarily lead to cross-pollination.
If pollen does find its way to an adjacent crop of oilseed rape,
this crop must be in flower and can't be pollinated if already fertilised.
Oilseed rape is mainly self-pollinating, which means pollen from
a particular flower fertilises that same flower. The remaining flowers
rely on pollen from adjacent flowers or plants in that field and
rarely on pollen from another field . Although oilseed rape can
in theory pollinate related species such as wild radish, it is unlikely
to happen in reality. Even if cross-pollination were successful,
it would produce few seeds and the hybrids would be weak and unable
to produce vigorous, fertile plants.
The hybrids would not persist forever as some anti GM-campaigners
would like us to believe. Genetics simply does not work that way.
Current conventional crops that are herbicide-resistant, which we
have been growing for decades, have just as much chance of cross-pollinating
organic crops and wild relatives but they don't and are not likely
to, and nor are GM-varieties.
Q. GM-seeds have been planted
by mistake in several EU countries. What does this mean in terms
of health or environmental risks ?
A seeds company inadvertently sold oilseed rape (canola) to four
EU-countries, which contained a small amount of GM seed (about 1
per cent). This GM variety is very popular with North American farmers,
as it simplifies weed control, reduces chemical spraying, soil erosion
and pollution.
A very sensitive scientific test PCR (polymerase chain reaction)
discovered DNA, used in GM in a seed mix, indicating the presence
of GM seeds. It was unclear whether the mixing occurred through
cross-pollination or during post-harvest handling and transport.
This constitutes no threat to either the environment or health:
1) The mixed seeds have been planted for three consecutive years,
with no indication of environmental problems and no reason to expect
any. The involve seed company have used non GM techniques to ensure
that their crop be effectively male sterile, which means that the
plants only produce poor quality pollen. The chance of this crop
cross-pollinating other crops is virtually nil.
2) About 80 per cent of Canadian oilseed rape is exported and hundreds
of millions of people have eaten oils from this GM variety since
1996 without any problem. Purified and processed rapeseed oil contains
no DNA or protein; oil from GM and non-GM varieties is indistinguishable.
From a regulatory perspective, the European bioindustries would
support seed purity regulations (including a level of tolerance,
as there is no such thing as a 100 % pure seed variety, be it conventional
or GM). This support, however, should be conditional : regulations
should be applied both ways. Farmers paying for more expensive GM
seed would not want it to be contaminated with seed from conventional
or organic varieties.
The whole incident is the consequence of a misunderstanding. Crops,
be they organic, conventional or GM , are not grown in complete
isolation. We either use the technology, with all the direct (and
highly valued) benefits for farmers, consumers and the environment,
or we reject it because this complete isolation is impossible. Nor
does EU agriculture exist in isolation from the rest of the world.
Several major agricultural export countries have adopted GM crops
and others are following their example. Whether we like it or not,
we rely on these countries to feed us and they are not able to supply
guaranteed GM-free produce .
Q. Shouldn't we be concerned
about antibiotic resistance ?
Antibiotic resistance is an extremely worrying problem. It has
been caused by the overuse of antibiotics in both humans and animals
and it became a major concern long before GM crops existed. In the
very early stages of the GM process, scientists need to identify
the small percentage of plant cells that have taken up the relevant
gene. To do this the gene is coupled to a marker gene, for example
one that confers resistance to a specific antibiotic. The ability
of certain cells to survive subsequent exposure to that antibiotic,
while the rest die away, is a signal that the insertion process
has been successful in those cells.
However, the use of antibiotic resistance has come under fire from
anti-GM campaigners , who claim that antibiotic resistance genes
could be transferred to the bacteria living in the gut. Although
there is no reason to believe that such transfers could happen,
there have been moves to phase out antibiotic resistance markers.
The alternative system uses the gene for a naturally derived enzyme
, phospho-mannose isomerase. (There are hundreds of thousands of
enzymes in every living organism.. They are large, complex molecules
that make the chemistry of life possible.) This particular enzyme
enables plant cells to use a sugar called mannose as a source of
energy. The cells that manage to grow in the presence of mannose
have acquired the marker gene and have therefore also taken up the
other genes of interest.
This system, and also other ones based on other sugars, should allay
the fear that GM poses a danger to human health. These should allow
a refocusing of effort to tackle the overuse of antibiotics in intensive
farming and their overprescription in medicine which pose a far
greater threat to our health .
Q. What about the long-term effects
of foods developed using biotechnology ?
From years of research we know that the benefits of food biotechnology
are tremendous. The scientific consensus is that the risks associated
with food biotechnology products are fundamentally the same as for
other foods. Current science shows that foods made from biotechnology
are safe to consume and safe for the environment.
While there is no such thing as 'zero risk' for any food, consumers
can be confident that foods produced using biotechnology meet the
most stringent safety standards. Dr. James Watson, the Nobel Prize
winning scientist who discovered the structure of DNA, compared
the 'hysteria' surrounding the application of biotechnology to food
in Europe with the initial ban placed on medical biotechnology.
If that ban had continued, " it would have stopped us from understanding
cancer and a whole host of things ", he said. " To argue that you
don't know what is going to occur is true about everything in life.
People wouldn't get married, have children, do anything".
Q. How can biotech crops
be a part of the solution to feeding the growing world population
?
According to the statistics from the Population Division of the
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the world
population will probably increase to approximately 9 billion by
2050. (2000 : approx. 6 billion). The fact is that with more people
we will need to provide more food.
At the same time, there is little remaining land for farming, without
destroying valuable rainforest and wetland habitats. World hunger
is a complex issue that biotechnology can play a part in helping.
Thanks to continued improvements in agriculture and food production,
and to developments in food biotechnology, we will be able to grow
more food and better food on land already being farmed .
Q. What can we still expect from
agricultural biotechnology in terms of benefits ?
Research currently under way will greatly increase the numbers
and uses of the products of biotechnology. For example, researchers
are developing foods with improved nutritional qualities, plants
that can resist drought and animals with higher quality meat. Biotechnology
is considered to be one of the most important ways to increase farm
productivity in a sustainable and environmentally friendly way,
helping the agri-food industry to meet the increasing demand for
food from a rapidly expanding world population.
Agricultural biotech has already led to improvements in farm productivity
and adaptability in the increasing number of countries which actually
grow GM crops.
For example, breeders have developed tomatoes that produce fruit
early for locations that have a short summer and wheat that resists
diseases such as rust. It is probably safe to say that there is
not one crop grown in our gardens or on our farms that has not been
the subject of extensive development through selective breeding.
Gardeners and farmers are always looking for new varieties that
meet their needs.
Meanwhile, retailers want to offer consumers safer foods, with more
variety, better quality and wider availability.
At the same time, the exploding world population demands an ongoing
commitment to higher yields. Biotechnology helps breeders meet these
demands by increasing the precision and speed of breeding efforts.
It also increases the range of new traits that can be added to crops
.
Q. Legal protection of biotechnological
inventions
Context: A number of questions have been raised recently concerning
the Directive (98/44) of the EU's Council of Ministers and the European
Parliament on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions,
the so-called 'biotech patents Directive'. For example, there have
been questions raised as to how the Directive affects access to the
human genome data and possible restrictions on the research and applications
for which this data could be used. The following set of answers to
a number of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) is intended to clarify
and explain the provisions of the Directive and to allay any concerns.
|
