In
This Issue:
EU COMMISSION
PUBLISHES FIRST REPORT ON BIOTECH PATENTS DIRECTIVE
EuropaBio,
Europe's association of bioindustries, reports that the EU Commission
has published its first annual report on the development and implications
of patent law for biotechnology and genetic engineering. Bo Hammer
Jensen, Chairman of the Intellectual Property Working Group at EuropaBio
says that the report is an important part of the legal requirements
of the biotech patent directive, Directive 98/44/EC.
The report
highlights four key provisions of this directive: compatibility with
international agreements; patentability of plants and animals; the
patentability of elements isolated from the human body or otherwise
produced; and the exclusions from patentability provided in Article
6 of the directive. It is intended to accelerate implementation of
the directive in all Member States. The report also comments on some
of the controversial issues currently under discussion in the Member
States.
EuropaBio
and its members participated in the 10-year long debate with Parliament
and Council that led to the approval in 1998 of this directive. Additional
topics like the scope of patents for sequences or partial sequences
of genes isolated from the human body; and the patentability of human
stem cells and cell lines obtained from them will be studied and
analysed by a group of independent experts to be established this
November. The group will also support the Commission in identifying
priority topics to be dealt with in future reports.
Internal
Market Commissioner Frits Bolkestein said "A clear and equitable
patent regime, applied consistently across the EU, is crucial if
we are to exploit fully the medical, environmental, and economic
potential of biotechnology in line with high ethical standards. Unless
the 1998 directive is properly implemented, Europe's biotech sector
will be working with one hand tied behind its back and will fall
further and further behind."
The Commission
report can be downloaded at: http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!
celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=en&numdoc=31998L0044&model=guichett
NEW
RULES FOR BIOTECH PRODUCTS IN EU
New rules
governing the safety approval of field trials and the growing of
genetically modified (GM) crops in the European Union (EU) have just
come into force. Directive 2001/18/EC, approved in April 2001 following
a full debate amongst the European Commission, the Member States,
and the European Parliament, builds on the existing legislative framework.
According
to EuropaBio, this directive more clearly lays down the requirements
for the provision of information to the public, the monitoring of
possible long-term effects of growing modern biotechnology-derived
crops, and the labeling and tracing of genetically modified organisms
(GMOs).
"We
expect that this updated legislation will be immediately implemented
and that submissions made under the old rules and updated with the
necessary information to meet the requirements of the new directive
will now be evaluated by the EU Regulatory authorities," says
Simon Barber, Director, Plant Biotechnology Unit, EuropaBio. The
commercial introduction of these crops will also be dependent on
other necessary approvals, for instance, with respect to their safety
as food.
For further
information, contact Adeline Farrelly, EuropaBio Communications Manager,
at this email address: a.farrelly@europabio.org
CONTEXT AND
GM CROPS
Joseph
deVries, Associate Director of Food and Security at the Rockefeller
Foundation, believes that much of the global debate on GM crops is
about context. He said "Anti-biotech campaigners in food-secure,
developed countries see no reason to take the risks involved in biotechnology
in order to make food more abundant. For the billion or so chronically
hungry individuals of developing countries, the issue is far from
clear-cut".
He recounted
a recent trip he made to a family farm in Nampula Province of Mozambique
where an epidemic of cassava brown streak disease was occurring.
Though the region was not suited for corn, a few of the crops were
planted yet these were also being attacked by the parasitic weed,
Striga. The cowpea crops were also infested by pod borers.
DeVries
states that conventional crop breeding has failed to develop Striga-resistant
corn or insect-resistant cowpeas. Conventional breeding is also ill-equipped
to develop drought-tolerant maize and rice, insect-resistant maize,
or weevil resistant banana.
DeVries
further opines "To make responsible decisions regarding the
use of biotechnology, we have to consider the contexts. For the comfortable
and well off, struggling with our waistlines, rationalizing our fears
might require putting ourselves in someone else's sandals. But we
owe it to the poor farmers of this world to make use of biotechnology
to develop the best crops that they can grow."
The full
article can be downloaded at http://www.scidev.net/frame3.asp?id=0910200217234427&
t=C&authors=Joseph%20D.%20DeVries&posted=9%20Oct%202002&c=1&r=1
CATHOLIC CHURCH
OKS BIOTECHNOLOGY
Leaders
of the Catholic Church have expressed their continuing support for
biotechnology in agriculture in a forum organized by the Asia-Pacific
Community Building Foundation, held at the University of the Holy
Cross in Rome.
The forum
centered on the "ethics and applications of genetically modified
organisms in the Philippines" attended by church leaders and
scientists.
Bishop
Elio Sgreccia, vice president of the Pontifical Academy for Life,
said "There are no impediments to animal and vegetable biotechnologies." The
latter "can be justified with the motive that they are for the
good of man. God has conceived animals and vegetables as good creatures
for man's needs," the bishop added.
However,
God has also given man "the task and responsibility to govern
creation," which implies a grave responsibility, Bishop Sgreccia
emphasized. Therefore, "the use of plants and animals is legitimate,
but it does not represent an absolute right. The Church has an open
but conditioned position," he added.
Scientists,
meanwhile, said that biotechnology can become a "decisive weapon
in the struggle against hunger and environmental pollution." Francesco
Sala, professor of botany and vegetable technologies at the University
of Milan, explained that the present model of agriculture activity
is revealing some limits, which means that the world need more food,
and it must find "new methods" to increase productivity.
ISU RESEARCHERS
SAY BT CORN NOT TO BLAME FOR REPRODUCTIVE PROBLEMS IN SWINE
Researchers
at Iowa State University have concluded that genetically altered
corn is not to blame for higher-than-normal pseudopregnancy rates
in sows on five Iowa farms. Pseudopregnancy is a condition in which
a sow or gilt has a delay in its normal estrus cycle period. During
this delay, many behavioral or physical signs typical of pregnant
animals may be exhibited, but no pigs are ever delivered.
ISU reports
that an Iowa farmer first raised concerns that the Bacillus thuringiensis
(Bt) corn he had been feeding his sows might have had an impact.
Following publicity about the situation, a few other farmers said
they had fed Bt corn and also had reproductive problems in their
swine operations.
Some of
the producers met with veterinary and plant pathology experts at
Iowa State after which visits were made to five farms where reproductive
problems occurred. In addition, two farms where Bt corn was fed but
no fertility problems existed were evaluated.
ISU researchers
Thomas Carson, professor of veterinary medicine, and Gary Munkvold,
associate professor of plant pathology, said zearalenone, a mycotoxin
that acts like estrogen, is the one most often associated with pseudopregnancy.
Corn from the five farms studied was tested for the presence of mold
spores. On all the farms, pigs were fed a combination of feeds containing
Bt and non-Bt corn varieties. Fusarium molds were found, but none
of the corn samples contained any detectable zearalenone.
"It's
been known for many decades that Fusarium infection is very common
in corn kernels," said Munkvold. "However, the presence
of Fusarium does not necessarily mean that mycotoxins are present
at harmful concentrations."
Bt hybrids
typically have lower levels of Fusarium, so the producers involved
were surprised by the mold spores that were found. "When insects
feed on corn kernels, the kernels are more susceptible to infection," Munkvold
said. "Although Bt corn is not immune to Fusarium, it rarely
has insect injury to the kernels, so the risk for infection is reduced."
Munkvold
said there is no evidence that feeding grain from Bt hybrids poses
any danger to livestock. "Numerous feeding studies with a variety
of animals have been conducted and no detrimental effects have been
observed," he said.
JAPAN FOOD
INDUSTRY: GM CORN SAFE
The U.S. Grains Council reports that Japan's corn wet milling industry will
no longer make a distinction between non-biotech corn and approved biotech
varieties. The Japan Starch and Sweeteners Industry Association (JSSIA) recently
informed Japanese soft drink manufacturers, beer producers and other food companies
that, because of costs and logistical considerations, it will no longer supply
identity preserved, non-biotech corn to its customers.
Japan's
starch and sweetener industry uses nearly 4 million metric tons (close
to 160 million bushels) of corn per year. The industry began using
identity preserved, non-biotech corn last year after StarLink, a
biotech variety that was not approved by Japanese regulatory agencies,
made its way into U.S. export supplies. As a result, U.S. corn's
share of the Japanese starch and sweetener market declined from more
than 90 percent in 2000 to about 50 percent in 2001. However, U.S.
market share has rebounded in 2002, according to Cary Sifferath,
director of the Council's Tokyo office.
The U.S.
Grains Council is a private, non-profit partnership of farmers and
agribusinesses committed to building and expanding international
markets for U.S. barley, corn, grain sorghum and their products.
For more
information on the U.S. Grains Council, visit http://www.grains.org
GM TECHNOLOGY
AND NUTRITION
While
general nutrition has been greatly enhanced through increases in
the intake of calories, the availability of micronutrients remains
a serious problem for many in the developing world. Glenn Gregorio,
a scientist at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in
the Philippines, tackled the issue in a policy brief "GM technology:
the answer to poor nutrition?"
Gregorio
elaborated that the scientific community first called the world's
attention to micronutrient malnutrition in the late 1970s and 1980s.
In the 1980s, it was estimated that two billion people were at risk
of iron deficiency anemia, 1.6 billion of iodine deficiency disorders,
and more than 250 million young children of Vitamin A deficiency.
More than a decade later, food fortification and supplementation
programs have seen some success, but micronutrient malnutrition continues
to plague a large proportion of the world's poor.
GM technology
has the potential to make food in greater quantity and better quality
available to populations that need it most. In recent years, researchers
have also explored creating transgenic crops that produce specific
dietary molecules, including vitamins and fats. One example is Golden
Rice which was developed to increase the dietary intake of Vitamin
A. Genetic modification has also been used to develop soybeans with
increased levels of oleic acid, a mono-unsaturated fatty acid thought
to help reduce the risk of heart disease and the accumulation of
'bad' cholesterol.
However,
Gregorio says that the potential application of GM technology in
helping provide more nutritious food crops - especially in developing
countries - requires consideration of some issues. GM technology
should be equally or more cost-effective, nutritionally effective,
and sustainable than interventions such as fortification and supplementation
programs already being used. It is crucial that the introduced trait
will actually result in a measurable improvement in the nutritional
status of the malnourished, target population.
The use
of GM technology should be considered in the context of conventional
breeding techniques since some traits can be introduced through the
latter. There should be no serious, negative agronomic consequences
associated with the characteristic being added. Lastly, consumer
acceptance of the product is valuable. Gregorio further adds that
while these points must seriously be considered, it is important
not to be overly cautious since the benefits to developing countries
are potentially significant.
The policy
paper is available at http://www.scidev.net/dossiers/gm_crops/gmpolicy_gregorio.html
TEAR-FREE
ONIONS
Japanese
researchers have identified the enzyme that releases a tear-duct-tickling
chemical when an onion is cut. This may pave the way for a genetically
modified onion that does not cause people to cry when the bulb is
sliced, chopped, or diced.
Onion's
tear-jerker is a compound called propanthial S-oxide. It is made
by an enzyme known as lachrymatory-factor synthase which was discovered
by Shinsuke Imai of the House Foods Corporation in Chiba, Japan.
Previous
studies had suggested that onion's flavor compounds were behind the
effect. Chopping was thought to make them react with a common onion
enzyme, allinase, producing propanthial S-oxide.
Iman's
team says that now that a single, flavor-independent enzyme has been
identified, it would be simple to create an onion in which the enzyme
is absent, or suppressed. As a GM product, it could be one product
that would benefit consumers directly.
Details
of the research are available in Nature, 419, 685.
NEW AUSTRALIAN
LIFE SCIENCES CENTRE
Riverside
Life Sciences Centre in Sydney, Australia is the new home of scientists
from the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization
(CSIRO) whose research in molecular biology and food science will
seek ways to benefit human health and agribusiness.
The Centre
was officially opened at a ceremony attended by Prime Minister of
Australia John Howard, Federal Minister for Science Peter McGauran,
and Chief Executive of CSIRO Geoff Garrett.
"The
co-location of CSIRO Molecular Science and Food Science Australia
will focus CSIRO activities and allow synergies through shared equipment
and research collaborations," says Dr Garrett.
The new
facility houses 20 modern laboratories, 9 process bays, tissue culture
rooms, a modern auditorium, library, administration offices, meeting
rooms, and a staff canteen. It accommodates around 230 staff.
The new
Centre will also enhance CSIRO Molecular Science's ability to provide
economic, environmental, and social benefits to its partners in industry
and the community through the application of its expertise in chemical
and biological sciences.
More information
about the Centre can be obtained by emailing David Down at david.down@csiro.au |
