GMO Food for Thought

Food allergies are one of the most common types of allergies an individual can have. According to The Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network, scientists estimate that approximately 11 million Americans suffer from food allergies. An individual can be allergic to any food, including fruits, vegetables, and meats. Now, genetically modified foods have become the new concern for those with such allergies, which is why I was interested in reading about efforts of researchers to review the process for evaluating the potential risks of allergies in genetically modified food crops (When Food causes Allergies, CheckBiotech, 11/23/05).

According to the article, there is still no test that can predict with 100 percent certainty whether a new protein might cause an allergic reaction in a specific individual, or whether introducing a new food to a child might cause allergies. However, Dr. Richard E. Goodman, a professor in the Food Allergy Research and Resource Program at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, and his colleagues have worked on a comprehensive review on how genetically modified (GM) crops can be evaluated to assess their potential allergenic properties before being grown commercially, noting that food produced from genetically modified crops must be “as safe as the unmodified varieties.” The research team’s review was published in the International Archives of Allergy and Immunology.

Dr. Goodman and his team recommended four general assessments to identify proteins that would present a high risk of causing food allergies in some individuals. According to the article, theses tests have been used to assess the potential allergenicity of all commercially available genetically modified crops in the U.S. since 1996, with minor revision as knowledge of food allergens and allergies have improved.

These tests involve comparing its amino acid sequence with sequences from all known allergens, testing the new protein for resistance to digestion by the stomach enzyme, pepsin, in an acidic solution, testing blood samples from individuals with allergies to the source to determine whether certain antibodies bind tightly to the new protein, and analyzing the amount of the new protein in a genetically modified crop since many food allergens cause an allergic response when found in large amounts.

Dr. Goodman stated that if the assessments are applied, they can greatly reduce the risk of introducing allergenic proteins to food crops. According to the article, these tests should certainly always be improved, with the increasing knowledge of the experimental methods within the field of allergen testing.

“The process of specifically modifying single genes of food crops opens the door to a wide variety of benefits,” said Dr. Goodman.

As someone who has a food allergy, I’ve had concerns over the foods I eat. I can see the worries individuals may have over genetically modified foods and whether they could be allergic to such foods. The methods that Dr. Goodman and his colleagues have recommended are a great step in testing genetically modified foods for allergies and I hope that a test to completely predict allergic reactions to these foods is on the horizon. Considering the benefits of biotechnology and the power the technology can bring in helping the world’s food supply, keeping genetically modified foods as safe as possible, including testing for allergies, is essential.

Posted by AC Baumer at 6:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (1)

Sometimes science and religion can make for strange bedfellows. There are always moral and ethical issues that often come into question when a discussion of the two topics comes up. The same holds true for discussions regarding religious opinions on genetically modified foods and biotechnology. That’s why I was interested in reading recently about the efforts of a new U.S. ambassador in urging the Vatican to support genetically modified foods and biotech crops (Ambassador touts Genetically Modified Foods at Vatican, Fort-Worth Star-Telegram, 11/13/05).

The new U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See, Francis Rooney, met with Pope Benedict XVI on November 12th during an audience with the pontiff at the Vatican. According to news reports, Ambassador Rooney urged the Vatican to promote the potential of genetically modified crops during the meeting, saying there was a “moral imperative” to investigate the possible benefits of agricultural biotechnology to feed the hungry of the world.

“Nothing on its own can solve the problem of world hunger. But we cannot let irrational fears stop us from investigating what could be one part of the answer,” Ambassador Rooney told Pope Benedict XVI as he presented his credentials during the audience at the Vatican.

Pope Benedict told Ambassador Rooney that he urges the United States to continue its generous aid to poor countries, but stated that all political decisions must be based on ethical considerations that promote “the dignity, life, and freedom of each human person.” The Roman Catholic Church has no specific position on the matter.

However, biotechnology has found a welcome ear in some Vatican circles. Cardinal Renato Martino, who heads the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace has spoken favorably about biotechnology and even hosted an international conference on the topic two years ago. Cardinal Martino even told a conference last September that the Vatican was open to experimentation in the field of biotechnology, but stressed that the experimentation must be done with prudence.

In his comments during the audience at the Vatican, Ambassador Rooney said the advance of agricultural science could help people in even the most difficult environments produce crops to feed themselves.

“We look to the Holy See to help the world recognize the moral imperative of a true investigation of these technologies, “Ambassador Rooney said.

We all know that the United States is home to major multinational biotechnology companies and the potential of genetically modified foods to feed the hungry of the world and those in impoverished nations has been highly touted. Critics of the technology still remain, stating that the dangers of genetically modified foods outweigh the benefits. However, the meeting that Ambassador Rooney had with Pope Benedict XVI about genetically modified foods is a step in the right direction toward a new acceptance of the technology. Whether the Roman Catholic Church will take a position on the topic that could ultimately influence the opinions of other religions and even countries remains to be seen, but it’s a good start.

Posted by AC Baumer at 12:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

For years, scientists and researchers have worked to develop new foods and technologies in an effort to advance agricultural biotechnology. I’ve encountered similar projects like these over the years in my work as a grant researcher for a large university. That’s why I was very interested in reading about the efforts of a leading agricultural company to help in the production of genetically modified crops. The company is developing a technology that would produce drought-tolerant crops (Monsanto develops Drought Tolerance, CheckBiotech, 11/9/05).

Monsanto, a St. Louis, Missouri-based provider of agricultural products and solutions, has identified and developed genes that enable crops to grow in areas where even water is scarce. According to news reports, the implications for areas with severe drought are obvious, but the technology also would reduce the need for irrigation and conserve fresh water.

According to Dr. Robb Fraley, Monsanto’s Chief Technology Officer, this new technology is as significant as any new product the company has developed.

“Of all the fresh water that’s used around the world today, 70 percent of it goes into farming,” Dr. Fraley explained, and “the value of water is only going to escalate.”

Monsanto’s early testing of drought-tolerant corn, which is currently in the first of four phases, shows an average increase of 20 bushels an acre. By comparison, the company’s YieldGard Corn Borer protection increases products by six or seven bushels, on average, and its YieldGard Rootworm adds 10 to 14 bushels an acre.

According to reports, the company is also working on drought-tolerant genes for cotton, soybeans, and canola, in addition to corn. According to Dr. Fraley, Monsanto is not only testing these concepts in multiple crops, but are also evaluating multiple genes. He said the company currently has over 30 genes that researchers are evaluating.

Monsanto expects its drought-tolerant technology will be in commercial production as early as 2010. According to news reports, some of Monsanto’s competitors are also working on developing drought-tolerant technology, including DuPont and its Pioneer division.

Experts agree that this new technology will have a huge impact, but feel that the key issue is what is going to happen in the Third World countries.

“If those countries are willing to go the biotech route, then this is going to create a substantial amount of value,” said Dr. Jackson Nickerson, a professor at Washington University’s Olin School of Business.

The drought-tolerant technology that Monsanto is currently developing holds tremendous promise for the future of biotechnology and genetically engineered foods. With the harsh conditions in developing nations, this new technology can help grow essential foods needed to feed a growing population. The drought-tolerant technology can, as I’ve already mentioned, lessen the need for irrigation and conserve fresh water, which could ease the fears that environmentalists have about biotechnology. Although the commercialization of this technology is four or five years down the road, progress should continue. This technology will be a benefit for the farmer, the consumer, and for the betterment of the world.

Posted by AC Baumer at 8:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (1)

A new genetically modified creation is creating quite a stir in the scientific community as potentially being the next “miracle” in the field of biotechnology….genetically modified insects.

What? Biotech bugs?

That’s exactly what I said and according to some scientists, the successful application of these genetically modified insects could dramatically improve public health, enhance agricultural production, and even improve the natural environment (Biotech Insects can improve Health, Farming, Researchers say, CheckBiotech, 10/28/05).

According to a report in the October 2005 edition of Economic Perspectives, an electronic journal of the U.S. Department of State, there are two types of genetically modified insects under research: paratransgenic and transgenic. Paratransgenic insects are created by integrating a piece of DNA manipulated in the laboratory into the microbes that naturally inhabit their alimentary canal. Transgenic insects are the product of the physical integration of transgenes into the chromosomes of an insect.

The article states that generically altering an insect so that all of its descendants will also be genetically altered requires that the initial integration of the transgene occur in the chromosomes of cells that will produce sperm or eggs (since most insect reproduction is sexual). Genetically modified insects must have these characteristics readily visible so scientists or other researchers can have a way to control them during research, like in order to separate male from female insects.

Scientists are working to develop a broad array of insects with new characteristics that could make them useful in fighting the spread of infectious diseases, controlling noxious weeds and insect pests, and producing pharmaceuticals, such as genetically modifying honeybees to make them resistant to diseases and parasites.

The greatest interest in this new technology, according to the article, is that genetically modified insects may be able to save lives. According to the World Health Organization, mosquitoes spread malaria, which infects 300 to 500 million people and kills over 1 million annually. Chemical pesticides currently being used have negative effects on human health and the environment and the emergence of insects resistant to many pesticides have undermined the efficiency of these pesticides. Genetically modified mosquitoes carry a promise of a clean and radically solution to this problem.

The first confined field trials with different genetically modified insects have already been conducted and some projects are expected to reach full environmental release within three to five years. Technological and other obstacles will also prevent scientists and businesses from wide scale releases of these bugs for at least five to ten years more, according to scientists. Scientists and regulators will also need to deal with the uncertainty about the lasting effects these insects could have on ecosystems, public health, and food safety.

The thought of genetically modified insects in the environment is an unusual prospect. These insects could offer many promises including helping the production of foods and improving public health, but there is also the chance of an overriding public fear that such insects could be a detriment. Although the process is still in its initial stages, the United States and other governments need to develop a comprehensive policy on how these insects will be reviewed and regulated. Discussions on this potential technology need to take place now. However, it will be interesting to see how this technology progresses in the future. The possibilities are endless.

Posted by AC Baumer at 5:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

In my work as a grant researcher, I’ve seen a number of worthwhile efforts by university scientists and researchers who are working to develop new treatments for a wide range of diseases and conditions in order to improve the lives of individuals affected by such ailments. However, I was sad and a bit angry to read about some recent attacks on biopharmaceutical crops being grown in France to potentially treat cystic fibrosis and other diseases (Biopharming vs. Cystic Fibrosis, Truth About Trade & Technology, 10/21/05). The damage done to these crops that could potentially do so much for others has to make a person wonder why someone would do such a thing or why something like this could happen. It certainly made me ask those same questions.

According to news reports, during the summer of 2005, a French protest group known as the Collectif des faucheurs volontaires (or, “the Volunteer Reapers”), claimed responsibility for destroying biopharmaceutical crops planted by Meristem, a French company that is a leader in the plant-made pharmaceutical industry. These crops were reportedly intended to produce anti-cancer antibodies as well as proteins that would hopefully ease the effects of cystic fibrosis.

One organization that has come out and denounced the attacks on the crops by the “Volunteer Reapers” is the International Academy of Life Sciences, a global network of universities, medical schools, and related institutions that are dedicated to education, training, and research in key issues associated with the life sciences. According to Dr. Hilmar Stolte, president of the International Academy of Life Sciences, these groups may have damaged the hopes that individuals suffering from these illnesses have of finding a treatment that will allow them to lead a normal life one day.

“This case illustrates the need for informed dialogue on plant-made pharmaceuticals that looks at the medical issues and opportunities from a sound grounding in science,” said Dr. Stolte.

Dr. Stolte also called for continued work by researchers and organizations to develop biopharmaceutical crops and the need to continue a dialogue to further public understanding of the opportunities the technology offers.

“It is imperative that the public is informed about plant-made pharmaceuticals,” said Dr. Stolte. “It would be regrettable, and even tragic, if the combative political environment that currently exists in some parts of Europe were to curb investment in – or excuse the destruction of – potentially life-saving pharmaceutical crops.”

The attack was also met with opposition from the group Defeating Cystic Fibrosis as well as from the French Biotech Association, which publicly lamented the “climate of suspicion” that is propelled by groups such as the “Volunteer Reapers”, according to news reports.

Biotechnology brings so many benefits to medicine and science. As the population increases, there is a vital need to find new methods to feed and especially produce new medicines to treat individuals with grave illnesses and conditions. Plant-made pharmaceuticals are one answer to address this need for new treatments. It’s a shame that some organizations have to resort to damaging these promising methods because of misinformation and fear. I hope that these scientists and researchers will push forward and continue their efforts to produce new medical treatments. Their efforts are greatly needed.

Posted by AC Baumer at 4:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)