Download Forum: Environment Issue: The question of limiting the production

Forum: Environment
Issue: The question of limiting the production and use of genetically modified organisms
(GMOs)
Student officer: Nuša Muršič
Position: President
INTRODUCTION
Food and feed generally originates from plants and animals grown and bred by humans for
several thousand years. Over time, those plants and animals with the most desirable
characteristics were chosen for breeding the next generations of food and feed. This was, for
example, the case for plants with an increased resistance to environmental pressures such as
diseases or with an increased yield.
These desirable characteristics appeared through naturally occurring variations in the genetic
make-up of those plants and animals. In recent times, it has become possible to modify the
genetic make-up of living cells and organisms using techniques of modern biotechnology called
gene technology. The genetic material is modified artificially to give it a new property (e.g. a
plant's resistance to a disease, insect or drought, a plant's tolerance to a herbicide, improving a
food's quality or nutritional value, increased yield).
Such organisms whose genetic material has been altered (modification may include the mutation,
deletion or insertion of genes from another species) to achieve characteristics that may be more
desirable, such as bigger size or resistance to disease or bugs, longer shelf life, disease resistance
or different colors or flavors) are called 'genetically modified organisms' (GMOs). Food and feed
which contain or consist of such GMOs, or are produced from GMOs, are called 'genetically
modified (GM) food or feed'.
DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS
Mutation of genes- is a permanent alteration in the DNA sequence that makes up a gene, such
that the sequence differs from what is found in most people. Mutations range in size; they can
affect anywhere from a single DNA building block (base pair) to a large segment of a
chromosome that includes multiple genes.
Deletion of genes- is a mutation (a genetic aberration) in which a part of a chromosome or a
sequence of DNA is lost during DNA replication. Any number of nucleotides can be deleted,
from a single base to an entire piece of chromosome
Insertion of genes- is the addition of one or more nucleotide base pairs into a DNA sequence.
Shelf life- is the length of time that a commodity may be stored without becoming unfit for use,
consumption, or sale. In other words, it might refer to whether a commodity should no longer be
on a pantry shelf (unfit for use), or just no longer on a supermarket shelf (unfit for sale, but not
yet unfit for use). It applies to cosmetics, foods, medical devices, explosives, beverages,
pharmaceutical drugs, chemicals, batteries, and many other perishable items.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
WHY WERE GMOS INTRODUCED?
GMOs were primarily introduced because one in eight people among the world’s growing
population of seven billion do not have enough to eat, therefore new methods were searched to
feed the hungry and malnourished around the world and especially in developing countries.
WHERE ARE THEY USED?
GMOs are widely used in food, especially in processed foods because staple crops such as soy
beans and corn are nearly all modified. The National Center for Food and Agricultureal Policy
estimates that 90 percent of U.S. corn is genetically modified. Other widely modified crops
include canola oil, alfalfa and sugar beets. In addition to foods, GMOs are also today widely
used in scientific research and pharmaceuticals as well. Organisms that have been genetically
modified include micro-organisms such as bacteria and yeast, insects, plants, fish, and mammals.
PROS AND CONS
The dangers and benefits of GMOs are widely debated, but genetic modification is currently
allowed in conventional farming. In fact, many organizations and studies estimate that possibly
70% or more of all processed foods sold to consumers now contain genetically modified
ingredients.
The main arguments that have been put forward against the use of GMOs in agriculture include:
Potential negative effects on the environment
•Genes can end up in unexpected places: Through 'gene escape' they can pass on to other
members of the same species and perhaps other species. Genes introduced in GMOs are no
exception, and interactions might occur at gene, cell, plant and ecosystem level. Problems could
result if, for example, herbicide-resistance genes got into weeds.
•Genes can mutate with harmful effect: It is not yet known whether artificial insertion of genes
could destabilize an organism, encouraging mutations, or whether the inserted gene itself will
keep stable in the plant over generations. There is no conclusive data on this issue.
•'Sleeper' genes could be accidentally switched on and active genes could become 'silent':
Organisms contain genes that are activated under certain conditions -- for example, under attack
from pathogens or severe weather. When a new gene is inserted, a 'promoter' gene is also inserted
to switch it on. This could activate a "sleeper" gene in inappropriate circumstances. This is
especially relevant in long-lived organisms - such as trees. Sometimes the expression of genes is
even "silenced" as a result of unknown interactions with the inserted gene.
•Interaction with wild and native populations: GMOs could compete or breed with wild species.
Farmed fish, in particular, may do this. GM crops could pose a threat to crop biodiversity,
especially if grown in areas that are centres of origin of that crop. In addition, GM crops could
compete with and substitute traditional farmers' varieties and wild relatives that have been bred,
or evolved, to cope with local stresses.
•Impact on birds, insects and soil biota: Potential risks to non-target species, such as birds,
pollinators and micro-organisms, is another important issue. Nobody quite knows the impact of
horizontal flow of GM pollen to bees' gut or of novel gene sequences in plants to fungi and soil
and rumen bacteria. Besides, it is feared that widespread use of GM crops could lead to the
development of resistance in insect populations exposed to the GM crops. Planting "refuge"
areas with insect-susceptible varieties is advised to reduce the risk of insect populations evolving
resistance due to the widespread growing of GMO Bt-crops.
Potential negative effects on human health
•Transfer of allergenic genes: These could be accidentally transferred to other species, causing
dangerous reactions in people with allergies.
•Mixing of GM products in the food chain: Unauthorized GM products have appeared in the
food chain. For example, the GM maize variety Starlink, intended only for animal feed, was
accidentally used in products for human consumption.
•Transfer of antibiotic resistance: Genes that confer antibiotic resistance are inserted into GMOs
as 'markers' to indicate that the process of gene transfer has succeeded. Concerns have been
expressed about the possibility that these 'marker genes' could confer resistance to antibiotics.
This approach is now being replaced with the use of marker genes that avoid medical or
environmental hazards.
Potential socio-economic effects
•Loss of farmers' access to plant material: Biotechnology research is carried out predominantly
by the private sector and there are concerns about market dominance in the agricultural sector by
a few powerful companies. This could have a negative impact on small-scale farmers all over the
world.
•Intellectual property rights could slow research: The proprietary nature of biotechnology
products and processes may prevent their access for public-sector research. This might have a
stronger negative impact in developing countries where no private research initiatives are in
place. In addition, most developing countries still do not provide patent protection to
biotechnological products and technologies. Because patents have a national scope, the entry of
products developed through proprietary biotechnologies could be prevented in those external
markets where patent protection exists.
•Impact of 'terminator' technologies: Although these are still under development and have not yet
been commercialized, they would, if applied, prevent a crop from being grown the following
year from its own seed. This means that farmers could not save seeds for planting the next
season. Some believe that this technology, also known as the Technology Protection System,
could have the advantage of preventing out-crossing of GM seeds.
The arguments that have been put forward for the use of GMOs in agriculture include:
Potential benefits for agricultural productivity
•Better resistance to stress: If crops can be made more resistant to pest outbreaks, it would reduce
the danger of crop failure. Similar benefits could result from better resistance to severe weather,
such as frost, extreme heat or drought - although this would require manipulation of complex
combinations of genes and appropriate pest management practices to avoid excessive selection
pressure on the pest.
•More nutritious staple foods: By inserting genes into crops such as rice and wheat, we can
increase their food value, for inserting vitamin A.
•More productive farm animals: Genes might be inserted into cattle to raise their milk yield, for
example.
Potential benefits for the environment
•More food from less land: Improved productivity from GMOs might mean that farmers in the
next century won't have to bring so much marginal land into cultivation.
•GMOs might reduce the environmental impact of food production and industrial processes:
Genetically engineered resistance to pests and diseases could greatly reduce the chemicals
(insecticides, herbicides) needed for crop protection, and it is already happening. These
developments could not only reduce environmental impact - they could also improve the health
of farm and industrial workers.
•Rehabilitation of damaged or less-fertile land: Large areas of cropland in the developing world
have become saline by unsustainable irrigation practices. Genetic modification could produce
salt-tolerant varieties. Trees might also be improved or modified to become more tolerant of salt
and drought. They might also be selected or bred for rehabilitation of degraded land. This may
also become possible through organisms bred to restore nutrients and soil structure.
•Longer shelf lives: The genetic modification of fruits and vegetables can make them less likely
to spoil in storage or on the way to market. This could expand trade opportunities as well as
reduce massive wastage incurred in transport and supply.
•Biofuels: Organic matter could be bred to provide energy. Plant material fuel, or biomass, has
enormous energy potential.
Potential benefits for human health
•Investigation of diseases with genetic fingerprinting: 'Fingerprinting' of animal and plant
diseases is already possible. This technique allows researchers to know exactly what an organism
is by looking at its genetic blueprint. One benefit may be that veterinary staff can know whether
an animal is carrying a disease or has simply been vaccinated - preventing the need to kill
healthy animals.
•Vaccines and medicines: Similar to the long-established development of biotechnological
vaccines for humans, the use of molecular biology to develop vaccines and medicines for farm
animals is proving quite successful and holds great promise for the future. Plants are being
engineered to produce vaccines, proteins and other pharmaceutical products. This process is
called 'pharming'.
•Identification of allergenic genes: Although some are worried about the transfer of allergenic
genes, molecular biology could also be used to characterize allergens and remove them.
MAJOR PLAYERS INVOLVED
The United States of America
Compared to other countries, regulation of GMOs in the US is relatively favourable to their
development. GMOs are an economically important component of the biotechnology industry,
which now plays a significant role in the US economy. For example, the US is the world’s
leading producer of genetically modified (GM) crops. In 2012, of the 170.3 million hectares of
biotech crops globally, the United States accounted for 69.5 million, over 40% of the total. For
several crops grown in the US, genetically engineered varieties now make up the vast majority of
the crop. In 2013, 93% of the soy beans, 90% of the cotton, and 90% of the corn grown in the US
were genetically engineered for either herbicide tolerance or insect resistance.
European Union
The European Union (EU) has in place a comprehensive and strict legal regime on genetically
modified organisms (GMOs), food and feed made from GMOs, and food/feed consisting or
containing GMOs. The EU’s legislation and policy on GMOs, based on the precautionary
principle enshrined in EU and international legislation, is designed to prevent any adverse effects
on the environment and the health and safety of humans and animals, and it reflects concerns
expressed by sceptical consumers, farmers, and environmentalists. While marketing and
importing GMOs and food and feed produced with GMOs are regulated at the EU level, the
cultivation of GMOs is an area left to the EU Members. EU Members have the right to prohibit
or restrict the sale or cultivation of approved GMOs based on adverse effects on health and the
environment. A pending Commission proposal, as amended by the European Parliament, will
give EU Members more flexibility to invoke socio-economic grounds and impacts on local or
regional environments when imposing such measures.
POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS
There are widespread calls around the world for post-market surveillance systems to monitor for
possible long-term health and environmental effects of genetically modified foods (EU, UK, and
NAS websites). The United Kingdom’s Food Standards Agency plans to monitor consumption
patterns of genetically modified foods and to match them to data on Birth defects, cancer
incidence, diabetes and other diseases. Along with a surveillance program, the European Union is
in the process of designing a mandatory traceability program (tracking GMOs and GM
food/feed products at all stages of the supply chain) for all GM foods grown in and imported into
Europe. Both of these programs involve mandatory labelling of GM food products. In the
absence of any reliable physiological tests to detect genetically modified foods in the body postconsumption, food labelling is the only way for consumers and regulators to know which GM
foods
are
being
consumed
and
in
what
quantities.
In the US, the National Academy of Sciences has called for a similar surveillance program (NAS
website). The US government opposes a mandatory labelling and food traceability program on
the basis that there is no threat to public health by GM foods and that it would be too costly to
industry. However, consumer demand for traceability and labelling may cause manufacturers to
adopt these practices on their own.
USEFUL LINKS
http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/gmo/traceability_labelling/index_en.htm
http://www.fao.org/english/newsroom/focus/2003/gmo8.htm
http://www.fao.org/english/newsroom/focus/2003/gmo7.htm
http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/x9602e/x9602e07.htm#TopOfPage
http://www.fao.org/biotech/logs/C9/summary.htm
http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/i1905e/i1905e03.pdf
http://www.gmeducation.org/government-and-corporations/p207350-un-s-food-and-agricultureorganisation-issues-gmo-warning.html
http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/genetically-modified-organisms-gmos-transgeniccrops-and-732
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/topics/topic/gmo