Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Is GM Food Safe to Eat? Dr Judy Carman BSc (Hons) PhD MPH MPHAA Director Institute of Health and Environmental Research How GM Food is Made • • • • • • • Biolistics Inserted randomly Affect function of plant? New substances produced? Plants, animals, bacteria, fungi, viruses Cauliflower mosaic virus Antibiotic resistance Genetically modified to be: • • • • Resistant to a herbicide Make its own pesticide(s) Both Multi-stacked Four main crops • • • • Corn – tacos, corn chips, cornflour, oil Soy – bread, baked products, soy milk, oil Cotton - oil Canola – oil (margarine) GM Food in Australia • Approved as safe: – – – – – – Soy Canola Potato Sugarbeet Cotton Corn • Present in: – – – – – – – – – Bread Pastries Snack foods Baked products Oil Fried foods Confectionary Soft drinks Sausage skins FSANZ assesses human food safety • Main role is public health and safety • Other roles: – Promote fair trade – Promote trade and commerce – Promote consistency between domestic and international concerns • None of its own safety testing • Safe until proven harmful Unlabelled • • • • From animals fed GM (meat, milk, eggs, honey) Highly refined (oils, sugars, starches) Bakeries, restaurants, takeaways “Unintentionally contaminated” up to 1% per ingredient • Processing aids, food additives using GM microbes • GM flavours at less than 0.1% Clinical Trials • • • • • • Animal testing Phase I - toxicity in healthy volunteers Phase II - therapeutic effect Phase III - randomised controlled trial Phase IV - monitor Meta-analysis / Cochrane Collaboration FSANZ policy • No animal feeding studies needed • No review of GM company raw data Information from: • FSANZ documents – From GM company applications – Rarely published data • Almost nil from independent scientists FSANZ documents – testing done • 12 reports for 28 GM plants • Compositional analyses • Animal studies Compositional Studies • Usually only amino acids • Usually not fatty acids • Sometimes anti-nutrients • • • • • • Sample size Mean Standard deviation 95% confidence interval of mean Nature of statistical test P-value Substantial Equivalence • Corn MON 810 had 8/18 (44%) amino acids different • “Substantially equivalent” • Royal Society of Canada: “Scientifically unjustifiable and inconsistent with precautionary regulation of the technology” Human and Animal Testing • No human testing • Animal testing (of 28 foods) – No testing (1 corn) – Acute toxicology of protein – Whole food Acute Toxicology • • • • Of protein expect to find Only animal testing done for 61% Oral gavage, observe 7-14 days Assumes: – Only new substance is GM’d one – Plant-produced acts same as bacterially-produced – Creates disease within 14 days Animal Testing • • • • • • • • Unusual human health models Fed 4 weeks Small sample sizes Death Body weights Sometimes organ weights “Gross pathology” Often no data given Adverse or unexpected effects • Been found • Canola GT73 – Increased liver weights 12-16% – Increased glucosinolates (1/3) – Meal not fed to humans, so OK – Oil not fed to animals • MON863 corn – 90 day feeding study – Monsanto – no problems – Seralini – pattern of toxicity - liver and kidneys – FSANZ returned study in 10 days RR soy – reproduction study CSIRO GM pea • • • • • • DNA from bean into pea Allergy study not needed Protein the same – glycosylation Pigs, chickens, rats – poorly digestible 5 measures of allergy abnormal Cross-priming Feeding Studies Needed • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Long-term feeding studies Biochemistry Immunology Allergies Neurology Tissue pathology Microscopy Gut Function Liver function Kidney function Full autopsy Cancer Reproduction Teratology Things that could go wrong Substantial Equivalence • • • • • No definition Showa Denko KK GM bacteria produced tryptophan 37 died, 1500 permanently disabled Eosinophilia-myalgia syndrome • GM organism produced 1 or more dangerous substances • Highly substantially equivalent (99.6% pure) • Highly purified Novel DNA • DNA for antibiotic resistance • 7 people with colostomy bags • Single meal: GM soy burger, GM soy milkshake • “A relatively large proportion of GM DNA survived passage through small bowel” • Evidence of genes from GM soy into intestinal microbes • GM DNA in cow's milk • Food-ingested foreign DNA can cross gut wall into blood leucocytes and into several organs and immune cells. Novel Protein • Food allergies (eg peanuts) • Mad cow disease (new variant Creutzfeld Jacob disease) Where are all the sick people? • Assume that GM food is making people ill. • How easy would it be to find the proof that GM food is causing the illness? Identify the problem • What do you look for? • Surveillance systems only for few, existing diseases. • HIV/AIDS took decades to find Investigate the problem • Surveillance does not give cause – need investigation • Competitive research grant system • Causes suggested – usually known ones • Food histories problematic • Hard to find food-related cause Public Health Action • Public would want food removed from food supply • Hard to find very strong evidence • Tobacco industry • Can’t recall it from fields Scientists Measure Risk • Probability of something happening • Consequences if it does Community measures risk • Sandman’s model: Risk = hazard + outrage Who takes the risk? Who gets the benefit? Why take the risk? www.iher.org.au