Pros and Cons of GM Food

There are many negative and positive concerns for GM Food. The following list will allow you to realize the benefits of GM Food and the debate of it. Genetic Modified Foods has many positive effects to crops, animals, environment, and the society as well. However, there are also negative effects in terms of safety to human health, access and intellectual property, ethic values, labeling conflicts, and the society as well.

PROS

"Crops -

• Enhanced taste and quality
• Reduced maturation time
• Increased nutrients, yields, and stress tolerance
• Improved resistance to disease, pests, and herbicides
• New products and growing techniques

Animals -

• Increased resistance, productivity, hardiness, and feed efficiency
• Better yields of meat, eggs, and milk
• Improved animal health and diagnostic methods

Environment -

• "Friendly" bioherbicides and bioinsecticides
• Conservation of soil, water, and energy
• Bioprocessing for forestry products
• Better natural waste management
• More efficient processing

Society -

• Increased food security for growing populations

CONS

Safety -

Potential human health impact: allergens, transfer of antibiotic resistance markers, unknown effects Potential environmental impact: unintended transfer of transgenes through cross-pollination, unknown effects on other organisms (e.g., soil microbes), and loss of flora and fauna biodiversity

Access and Intellectual Property -

• Domination of world food production by a few companies
• Increasing dependence on Industralized nations by developing countries
• Biopiracy—foreign exploitation of natural resources

Ethics -

• Violation of natural organisms' intrinsic values
• Tampering with nature by mixing genes among species
• Objections to consuming animal genes in plants and vice versa
• Stress for animal

Labeling -

• Not mandatory in some countries (e.g., United States)
• Mixing GM crops with non-GM confounds labeling attempts

Society -

• New advances may be skewed to interests of rich countries "

http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/gmfood.shtml

WE WANT REAL FOOD!

In December 2006, the FDA, an organization that’s responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, medical devices, our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation. The FDA is also responsible for advancing the public health by helping to speed innovations that make medicines and foods more effective, safer, and more affordable; and helping the public get the accurate, science-based information they need to use medicines and foods to improve their health” announced that meat and milk from cloned livestock are safe for human to consume.

There action had brought to many people’s concern regarding the risks behind cloned foods, and ethical concerns of the animals. FDA also stated that it is not required to label cloned food, so consumer should be aware that from now on, we will not know whether we are consuming experimental foods and will not be able to avoid it.

“Numerous opinion polls show that the majority of Americans do not want food from animal clones and are opposed to cloning on moral or ethical grounds.“ There were also studies on the risks of cloned foods; however, no long-term food safety studies have been done. Statistics shows that over 90% of cloning attempts to fail, and the cloned animals tend to have more health problems and higher mortality rates than sexually reproduced animals.”There wasn’t enough studies done to be sure that cloned livestock are safe to eat, and the worst is that it is harder for us to avoid cloned food. To ensure our safety, and if interested, please take actions by sending a letter regarding this issue to FDA.

http://www.truefoodnow.org/ - click to take action

http://www.fda.gov/opacom/morechoices/mission.html

GLOW IN THE DARK PIGS!

Other than genetically modified foods, there are also animals that have been changed by injecting genes in them. One of the few animals that show genetic results is pigs. From the picture, we see that glow in the dark pigs exist in the world nowadays.

There are three glows in the dark pigs that exist in Taiwan today. “The pigs are transgenic, created by adding genetic material from jellyfish into a normal pig embryo” stated Chris Hogg. “In daylight, the researchers say the pigs' eyes, teeth and trotters look green. Their skin has a greenish tinge.” Although the three pigs are green from the inside out, including their heart and internal organs, mentioned the researchers, they are no different than any other pigs. In the past years, fluorescent pigs have been created by injecting modified genes in them. But this is the first time where pigs are green and glow.

Researchers are now using the pigs to study human diseases. Because their genetic material shows up to be green, so it is easier for the scientist to spot and track its development.

view a video of the pigs on this site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4605202.stm

Questions On Genetic Modified Food

GM food has been a wide-known topic for many years. Many people have questioned the consequences of it. The questions below are some common questions on genetic modified foods that relates to our everyday life.

"Q. Why are GM foods produced?

GM foods are developed – and marketed – because there is some perceived advantage either to the producer or consumer of these foods. This is meant to translate into a product with a lower price, greater benefit (in terms of durability or nutritional value) or both. Initially GM seed developers wanted their products to be accepted by producers so have concentrated on innovations that farmers (and the food industry more generally) would appreciate.

The initial objective for developing plants based on GM organisms was to improve crop protection. The GM crops currently on the market are mainly aimed at an increased level of crop protection through the introduction of resistance against plant diseases caused by insects or viruses or through increased tolerance towards herbicides.

Insect resistance is achieved by incorporating into the food plant the gene for toxin production from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (BT). This toxin is currently used as a conventional insecticide in agriculture and is safe for human consumption. GM crops that permanently produce this toxin have been shown to require lower quantities of insecticides in specific situations, e.g. where pest pressure is high.

Virus resistance is achieved through the introduction of a gene from certain viruses which cause disease in plants. Virus resistance makes plants less susceptible to diseases caused by such viruses, resulting in higher crop yields.

Herbicide tolerance is achieved through the introduction of a gene from a bacterium conveying resistance to some herbicides. In situations where weed pressure is high, the use of such crops has resulted in a reduction in the quantity of the herbicides used.

Q. Are GM foods assessed differently from traditional foods?

Generally consumers consider that traditional foods (that have often been eaten for thousands of years) are safe. When new foods are developed by natural methods, some of the existing characteristics of foods can be altered, either in a positive or a negative way National food authorities may be called upon to examine traditional foods, but this is not always the case. Indeed, new plants developed through traditional breeding techniques may not be evaluated rigorously using risk assessment techniques.

Q. How are the potential risks to human health determined?

The safety assessment of GM foods generally investigates: (a) direct health effects (toxicity), (b) tendencies to provoke allergic reaction (allergenicity); (c) specific components thought to have nutritional or toxic properties; (d) the stability of the inserted gene; (e) nutritional effects associated with genetic modification; and (f) any unintended effects which could result from the gene insertion.

Q. What are the main issues of concern for human health?

Allergenicity - As a matter of principle, the transfer of genes from commonly allergenic foods is discouraged unless it can be demonstrated that the protein product of the transferred gene is not allergenic. While traditionally developed foods are not generally tested for allergenicity, protocols for tests for GM foods have been evaluated by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and WHO. No allergic effects have been found relative to GM foods currently on the market.

Gene transfer - Gene transfer from GM foods to cells of the body or to bacteria in the gastrointestinal tract would cause concern if the transferred genetic material adversely affects human health. This would be particularly relevant if antibiotic resistance genes, used in creating GMOs, were to be transferred. Although the probability of transfer is low, the use of technology without antibiotic resistance genes has been encouraged by a recent FAO/WHO expert panel.

Outcrossing - The movement of genes from GM plants into conventional crops or related species in the wild (referred to as “outcrossing”), as well as the mixing of crops derived from conventional seeds with those grown using GM crops, may have an indirect effect on food safety and food security. This risk is real, as was shown when traces of a maize type which was only approved for feed use appeared in maize products for human consumption in the United States of America. Several countries have adopted strategies to reduce mixing, including a clear separation of the fields within which GM crops and conventional crops are grown.

Q. Why has there been concern about GM foods among some politicians, public interest groups and consumers, especially in Europe?

Since the first introduction on the market in the mid-1990s of a major GM food (herbicide-resistant soybeans), there has been increasing concern about such food among politicians, activists and consumers, especially in Europe. Several factors are involved. Consumers frequently ask, “what is in it for me?”. Where medicines are concerned, many consumers more readily accept biotechnology as beneficial for their health (e.g. medicines with improved treatment potential). In the case of the first GM foods introduced onto the European market, the products were of no apparent direct benefit to consumers (not cheaper, no increased shelf-life, no better taste). The potential for GM seeds to result in bigger yields per cultivated area should lead to lower prices. However, public attention has focused on the risk side of the risk-benefit equation. Consumer confidence in the safety of food supplies in Europe has decreased significantly as a result of a number of food scares that took place in the second half of the 1990s that are unrelated to GM foods. This has also had an impact on discussions about the acceptability of GM foods. Consumers have questioned the validity of risk assessments, both with regard to consumer health and environmental risks, focusing in particular on long-term effects. Other topics for debate by consumer organizations have included allergenicity and antimicrobial resistance. Consumer concerns have triggered a discussion on the desirability of labelling GM foods, allowing an informed choice. At the same time, it has proved difficult to detect traces of GMOs in foods: this means that very low concentrations often cannot be detected.

Q. What is the state of public debate on GM foods in other regions of the world?

The release of GMOs into the environment and the marketing of GM foods have resulted in a public debate in many parts of the world. This debate is likely to continue, probably in the broader context of other uses of biotechnology (e.g. in human medicine) and their consequences for human societies. Even though the issues under debate are usually very similar (costs and benefits, safety issues), the outcome of the debate differs from country to country. On issues such as labelling and traceability of GM foods as a way to address consumer concerns, there is no consensus to date. This has become apparent during discussions within the Codex Alimentarius Commission over the past few years. Despite the lack of consensus on these topics, significant progress has been made on the harmonization of views concerning risk assessment. The Codex Alimentarius Commission is about to adopt principles on premarket risk assessment, and the provisions of the Cartegena Protocol on Biosafety also reveal a growing understanding at the international level. Most recently, the humanitarian crisis in southern Africa has drawn attention to the use of GM food as food aid in emergency situations. A number of governments in the region raised concerns relating to environmental and food safety fears. Although workable solutions have been found for distribution of milled grain in some countries, others have restricted the use of GM food aid and obtained commodities which do not contain GMOs.

Q. What further developments can be expected in the area of GMOs?

Future GM organisms are likely to include plants with improved disease or drought resistance, crops with increased nutrient levels, fish species with enhanced growth characteristics and plants or animals producing pharmaceutically important proteins such as vaccines. At the international level, the response to new developments can be found in the expert consultations organized by FAO and WHO in 2000 and 2001, and the subsequent work of the Codex ad hoc Task Force on Foods Derived from Biotechnology. This work has resulted in an improved and harmonized framework for the risk assessment of GM foods in general. Specific questions, such as the evaluation of allergenicity of GM foods or the safety of foods derived from GM microorganisms, have been covered and an expert consultation organized by FAO and WHO will focus on foods derived from GM animals in 2003."

credit to: http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/biotech/20questions/en/

What is Government’s Role on GM Food?

In many places, governments are performing different action toward GM Food. Since April 2001, Ministry of Health and Welfare in Japan declared that testing of GM Foods is mandatory. Some other places like Brazil “have banned GM crops entirely, and the Brazilian Institute for the Defense of Consumers, in collaboration with Greenpeace, has filed suit to prevent the importation of GM crops.” Also, “Europe now requires mandatory food labeling of GM foods in stores, and the European Commission (EC) has established a 1% threshold for contamination of unmodified foods with GM food product.”

However, India’s government does not have any policy on GM foods as yet because there are no GM crops or products available. But India is supportive of transgenic plant research because they feel that the benefits of GM food will help ease the problem of poverty, famine, and over populated.

In United States, there are three government agencies that research and have authority over GM foods. They include: EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), FDA (Food and Drug Administration), and USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). The “EPA evaluates GM plants for environmental safety, the USDA evaluates whether the plant is safe to grow, and the FDA evaluates whether the plant is safe to eat.”

http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/gmfood/overview.php

What's GM Foods?

Genetically Modified Foods have been available since the 1990s. GM foods (Genetically Modified Foods) are food produced from a GMO (genetically modified organism.) Basically, GM foods are foods that consist of genetic materials that have been modified in the laboratory into an organism to bring out its useful and satisfying traits of the organism. The genes will customize the organisms in many ways, ranging from its appearance to its behavior, or by its nutritional content.

Genetically Modified Foods has aroused many environmental organizations and interest groups to study and protest its effects. Even governments around the world are trying to establish a plan to help sustain the effects of GM plants. However, different government are responding in different was, depending on their region’s climate and political, social, and economic terms.

http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/gmfood/overview.php