In This
Issue:
GAO REPORT:
BIOTECH FOODS 'AS SAFE AS CONVENTIONAL FOODS'
The
General Accounting Office of the U.S. government has released a
report concluding that foods produced using biotechnology are as
safe as conventional foods. It stated that there is no scientific
evidence that they would cause long-term health risks to consumers.
The
report entitled “Genetically Modified Foods: Experts View
Regimen of Safety Tests as Adequate, but FDA’s Evaluation
Process Could Be Enhanced” notes that “Foods from GM
plants pose three types of risk to human health: they can potentially
contain allergens, toxins, or antinutrients. These risks are not
unique to GM foods. People have consumed foods containing allergens,
toxins and antinutrients throughout history.”
In addition,
suggestions were made to improve the process being followed by
the US Food and Drug Administration to evaluate new biotech foods.
The FDA, according to the report, should enhance its oversight
role in two ways. One is to randomly verify the raw data companies
provide about new products since the agency currently reviews summaries
of that data. The second is to improve its system of informing
the public about its evaluation process and the scientific rationale
behind its decisions.
The
full report can be viewed at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02566.pdf.
A news item on the report is available at http://www.whybiotech.com/index.asp?id=2098
EU DIRECTIVES
ON GM SEEDS
A separate
legislation has been formulated by the European Union (EU) specifically
for genetically modified (GM) seeds. All GM seed varieties have
to be approved and authorized for cultivation in the EU under Directive
2001/18. Authorization is only granted after scientific assessments
have concluded that the GM seeds do not pose any risks to the environment
or to human health.
The
EU Directives on the marketing of agricultural and vegetable seeds
aim to improve the quality of seeds (e.g. identity and purity of
the variety) that are currently marketed in the EU. Requirements
were specifically made regarding sealing, labeling and documentation.
Further,
a minimum threshold for the presence of authorized GM varieties
was specified for seed lots of non-genetically modified (non-GM)
varieties. To date, only GM-maize, GM-swede rape, GM-soya bean
and GM-chicory are currently authorized in the EU. Requests for
authorization for GM-potatoes, GM-beet and GM-cotton have already
been made.
The
Commission proposes a threshold for GM-presence in conventional
seeds according to the species, and the reproductive systems of
the plants. Thresholds specified for GM crops are as follows: 0.3%
for swede rape; 0.5% for beet, maize, potato, cotton, chicory and
tomato; and 0.7% for soya bean.
For
Questions and Answers about GMOs in seeds, please visit http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc
=MEMO/03/186|0|RAPID&lg=EN&display=
FACTORS AFFECTING
CHINA’S IMPORT REGULATIONS ON GMF
Several
factors are shaping China’s regulations on imports of transgenic
food products, particularly soybeans. These include food safety
considerations, protection of China’s domestic producers,
consumers, and crusher’s demand for soybeans, World Trade
Organization commitments, and political factors. This is the assessment
of Mary Marchant of the University of Kentucky and colleagues in
an article on “Issues on Adoption, Import Regulations, and
Policies for Biotech Commodities in China with a Focus on Soybeans”.
Health
was identified as a major determinant affecting decisions on adoption
of production technologies that use biotechnology, and regulations
in imports of transgenic food products. Implementation of import
regulations is also projected as a tool to protect China’s
domestic producers.
Despite
these factors, however, China’s strong and growing domestic
demand for imported soybean will continue to affect the implementation
of import regulations. Future decisions will also be affected by
international debates on biotech product issues.
The
full article in available online at http://www.agbioforum.org/v5n4/v5n4a05-marchant.htm
BIOTECH PARTNERSHIP
BETWEEN PAKISTAN AND CHINA
Pakistan
has recently signed an agreement with China to increase its global
biotechnology presence by agreeing to exchange biotechnology experts
and to collaborate in plant and rice genomics research.
According
to Professor Atta-ur-Rahman, Federal Minister for Science and Technology
and leader of the negotiations with China, Pakistan has the potential
to become a player in the global biotechnology market in the next
three to five years. Rahman added that Pakistan's agriculture-based
economy and strong research and development infrastructure would
also help attract international investment.
Early
in the year, Pakistan released a national biotechnology action
plan that aims to prioritize vaccine production, biodiagnostics,
and improved crop yields. And for over the past three years, Pakistan
has invested US$16.5 million in biotechnology promotion. At present,
about 50 new biotechnology projects ranging from the design of
new textbooks to research into blight-resistant rice varieties
are underway.
Further,
Pakistani officials recently devised new biosafety guidelines that
will serve as a framework for future national biotechnology initiatives.
These guidelines are being reviewed by Pakistan's Ministry of Environment.
The
new release can be found at Nature Biotechnology.
POLITICS AND COMMUNICATION IN GM DEBATE
The
recent public debate in Europe and the trade row between the United
States and the European Union have shown that there is a need for
more impartial communications, less propaganda and an effective
regulatory regime that is based an a careful case-by-case consideration
of genetically modified technology. These requirements must be
met so that developing nations who have the most to gain from the
technology can start to reap its benefits. This is the view shared
by Charles Arntzen of Arizona State University and his colleagues
in an article entitled “GM Crops: Science, Politics, and
Communication” published in Nature Reviews. They raise several
key points:
- Positioning
genetically modified crops as “good or bad” is a
failure to recognize that each product of plant biotechnology
is a discrete technology package that must be discussed on its
individual merit.
- Improving
public knowledge means working with media and public bodies over
a sustained period, using evidence-based material, not rhetorical
hype.
- The
actual experience of a disastrous food crisis has had more impact
on public attitudes than the different modes of media coverage.
Restoring structure and credibility in science and government
will require open dialogue, transparency, and time. However,
consumers must see some perceived value for attitudes to change.
- GM
crops are here to stay and the timing of their adoption will
be determined by the economic and societal impact of each product.
The
article ends with the conclusion that “as the technology
matures and disperses, and as other nations begin to develop their
own varieties that deliver value to their farmers and citizens,
GM crops will lose their globalization stigma and become more widely
accepted around the world.”
Read
the whole article in Nature Reviews, Volume 4, October 2003 issue.
FISCHLER ON
GMO CO-EXISTENCE
Commissioner
Franz Fischler presented the European Union (EU) recommendation
on the guidelines concerning the co-existence of GMOs with conventional
and organic farming. According to Fischler, the question of safety
and environmental risk assessment of GMOs is already well addressed
under existing Community legislations on the authorization of GMOs.
Thus, the guidelines on co-existence will not anymore address food
safety or environmental concerns.
The
Commissioner also reiterated his strong belief that the EU should
be open to the possibility of using and developing biotechnology
in European agriculture. He stated that by establishing the conditions
for co-existence, farmers must be given the assurance that they
may still use conventional and organic farming methods if they
prefer to do so.
For
the full story, http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&
doc=MEMO/03/187|0|RAPID&lg=EN&display=
ECONOMICS OF
AG-BIOTECH RESEARCH
The
working paper of Carl E. Pray and Anwar Naseem entitled “The
Economics of Agricultural Biotechnology Research,” examined
the economic determinants and the impact of agricultural biotechnology
research. The authors also assessed the capability of agricultural
biotechnology and its potential to address the needs of the poor
in developing countries.
Based
on their analysis, Pray and Naseem states that the private sector
in industrialized countries conducts research only if it expects
that the financial benefits will outweigh the costs. Benefits are
measured via the foreseen market size of the new technology, and
the appropriate intellectual property rights.
On the
other hand, the public sector, through research, is perceived as
providing public goods that yield social benefits that are not
captured by private firms. Public research, likewise, responds
to factors such as markets for innovations and research costs similar
to the private sector. However, apart from these considerations,
public sector research must also fulfill political as well as financial
goals.
Lastly,
the authors observed that private research spending has so far
caught up with public spending in the industrialized countries,
but still lags far behind in developing countries.
The
working paper is available at http://www.fao.org/es/ESA/wp/ESAWP03_07.pdf.
CHINESE CONSUMERS:
LOW KNOWLEDGE OF GM FOODS
Chinese
consumers (25%) have little knowledge of genetically modified (GM)
food, and most of them believe that GM foods should be labeled.
Media attention on the issue of GM foods have also increased and
most of the articles written were negative in tone. These were
the major findings of a case study done in Nanjing by Funing Zhong
of the Nanjing Agricultural University, and colleagues.
Funing
Zhong and colleagues also learned that Chinese consumers were not
particular about how the production, marketing, and labeling of
GM foods are regulated. What the consumers were mostly concerned
about was that these food products are labeled.
The
major findings of the case study are as follows:
- Fifty
percent (50%) of urban consumers have not heard of GM foods at
all; and of those who are familiar with GM foods, only 25% said
they knew something about GM foods.
- Forty
percent (40%) of Chinese urban consumers will buy GM foods based
on basic information alone.
- Twenty
percent (20%) of consumers were convinced that GM foods are unsafe,
while 30% to 50% still have not made up their minds about the
acceptability of GM foods.
- GM
foods with nutritional enhancements and improved medical functions
were more acceptable to consumers than pest resistant characteristics.
- All
consumers firmly believe that GM foods should be labeled, although
labeling of such foods do not guarantee that consumers would
be convinced about their safety.
- Consumers
who were younger, female, or had higher education were more reluctant
to accept GM foods. Consumers who were older, male and less educated
were more receptive to biotechnology.
A copy
of the case study is available at http://www.agbioforum.org/v5n4/v5n4a02-zhong.htm.
NON-GM AND GM
RAPE – BEES DON’T CARE
Honeybees,
bumblebees, solitary bees and Diptera cannot discriminate between
genetically modified (GM) rape and non-GM rape plants. Bees and
other insects move freely from one rape plant to another regardless
of their GM status, and thus are able to transfer pollen easily
to one another. This is a gist of a finding of French researchers
led by Jacquiline Pierre as they studied the foraging behavior
of various bees.
In addition,
similar insect numbers and behavior were found, and the equivalent
plants showed similar nectar volume, nectar sugar concentration,
and composition.
Pierre
however cautions that the research does not generalize about GM
plants having no impact on pollinator behavior. “In GM plants,
a case by case approach is absolutely recommended,” she says.
The
full paper entitled “Effects of Herbicide-tolerant Transgenic
Oilseed Rape Genotypes on Honeybees and Other Pollinating Insects
Under Field Conditions” is published in Entomologia Experimentalis
et Applicata.
Email
Jacqueline Pierre at pieere@rennes.inra.fr
ANNOUNCEMENT:
FUTURE
OF FOOD & BIOTECH CONFERENCE
The
Club of Amsterdam will hold a conference entitled “The Future
of Food & Biotech,” on October 28, 2003, in Amsterdam,
the Netherlands. Topics to be discussed are the impact of new technology
on the food industry.
More
information can be found at http://www.clubofamsterdam.com. | 
