UNEP: The Question of Genetically Modified Organisms Cambridge Model United Nations 2018

Transcription

1 Study Guide Committee: United Nations Environmental Program Topic: The Question of Genetically Modified Organisms Introduction: For millennia, humans have altered species in order to align with our needs, via artificial selection. Without artificial selection, or selective breeding, we would not have many of the organisms familiar to us, such as domesticated dogs, cats, farm animals, and even crops such as cauliflower, broccoli, and kale descended from wild mustard. However, in recent decades, this process of altering the genetics of organisms in order to better suit our needs has been accelerated: rather than breeding for many generations, and selecting the individuals that fit closest to our needs to breed for the next generation, we can use genetic engineering techniques to produce Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) The speed, efficiency, and scope of this technique means that the possible uses are huge, for example research into the function of certain genes, producing better crops and farm animals, and modifying bacteria to produce useful substances such as pharmaceuticals and enzymes, however there are understandable apprehensions from ethical, health, and ecological standpoints. Definition of Key Terms: Gene: a DNA sequence that codes a polypeptide, and that will in some way affect the characteristics of an organism. Genetically Modified Organism (GMO): organism or microorganism whose genetic material has been altered by means of genetic engineering. Note: in this context, GMOs do not refer to humans. CRISPR-Cas9: a fast, cheap, versatile and accurate genome editing tool, allowing addition, deletion, and alteration of sections of a DNA sequence. 1

2 Cisgenesis: process by which organisms are genetically modified, with genes artificially transferred between organisms that could otherwise be conventionally bred, ie closely related. Transgenesis: process by which organisms are genetically modified, with genes artificially transferred between organisms that could not otherwise be conventionally bred, ie distantly related. Tillage: the preparation of soil for agricultural use, which reduces weed growth and loosens the soil, but also increases soil erosion, and reduces nutrient concentration and ability to store water. Coexistence regulations: measures put in place during cultivation, harvest, transport, storage and processing to ensure coexistence of GMOs with conventional organic crops. Includes minimum distances of fields of GM crops and non GM crops. Contextual Information: Around 10,000 years ago, humans began to transition from a hunter-gatherer lifestyle into an agricultural lifestyle, artificially selecting traits of crops and animals that were beneficial to humans. In fact, most of the crops grown today would not be easily recognised as related to their natural ancestors. This selective breeding, coupled with machinery, mineral fertilisers, and pesticides led to a massive increase in agricultural productivity. With the discovery of DNA, and subsequent biotechnology revolution, the scope widened dramatically: farmers and scientists were no longer limited to selecting traits or alleles that arose due to mutations in that population - they could insert genes from entirely unrelated species, or alter the genome in a multitude of ways. Humans have been altering the gene pools of species for thousands of years, however the way we did it rapidly became quicker, more predictable, more versatile, and much more controversial. The technique of genetic engineering was first developed in the 1970s, first used for pharmaceutical applications in the 1980s (insulin), and first used for food in the 1990s (Zeneca s Flavr Savr GM tomato). Since then, some countries, such as the USA, Brazil, and India have grown, consumed, and sold vast quantities of genetically modified crops, while other countries have either partially banned cultivation and/or imports, including EU member states, or completely banned cultivation and imports, including Russia, Peru and Venezuela. 2

3 There are various benefits of using genetically modified crops. It is argued that GM crops are necessary for food security, due to an increasing world population, climate change, and increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events. As well as helping us to deal with a rapidly degrading environment, GM crops may actually help to reduce environmental degradation, for example they are less resource intensive, with reduced requirements for pesticides, fertilisers, and even water. This includes rice genetically modified to use C4 metabolism, which is more efficient than traditional C3 metabolism. Additionally, crops may be bred to have a longer shelf life, reducing food wastage. Genetically modifying crops can also increase the area and density that they can be grown in, and allow the crops to be more resistant to harsh environmental conditions. For example, herbicide tolerant crops reduce yield losses to weed competition, and insect resistant crop reduce yield losses to insect damage. This increased efficiency means that there is less pressure to add more farmland in order to keep up with growing global demand. In some areas, increasing the area of farmland is near impossible, for example areas undergoing desertification, and in other areas increasing the area of farmland is possible but unfavourable due to the associated dramatic loss in biodiversity, for example in the Amazon and Bornean Rainforests. Additionally, using plants that are herbicide tolerant and can grow in more compacted soil reduces the required frequency of tillage, eg plowing, so the rate of soil erosion decreases, and the availability of nutrients and water increases. They can even have a beneficial effect on human health, for example Golden Rice, which has been genetically modified to produce beta-carotene, a precursor of vitamin A, in the endosperm (main part of rice grain). It currently in test and trial phases, however it is intended to be grown and consumed in regions with a high rates of vitamin A deficiency (VAD). VAD cause 250, ,000 children to go blind each year, around half of which die within a year of becoming blind, as well as reducing immunity, and increasing maternal mortality. For many individuals, GMOs are concerning due to the perceived effect on human health. GM crops generally undergo extensive trials to ensure minimal effect on human health 3

4 (except for golden rice, which has undergone extensive trials to ensure a positive effect on human health). These tests assess toxicity, allergenicity, the specific components thought to have nutritional or toxic properties, the stability of the inserted gene, nutritional effects associated with the genetic modification, and any unintended effects which could result from the gene insertion. However, it is impossible to categorically say that all GM crops that could possibly be produced would have no effect on human health - it is entirely dependent on how exactly the genome has been altered. In general, the potential health and ecological impacts are different for cisgenic and transgenic GM crops. It may be wise for policies to differentiate between the two, in terms of the legality of cultivation and important, and the extent of trial required before cultivation and consumption. For example, the Dutch government has argued that cisgenic plants are of comparable safety to classically bred plants, and have the capacity to positively contribute to durable food production, and so should be excluded from the European GMO Regulation. Although GMOs can be argued to have a beneficial impact on the environment, as described above, they can also be argued to negatively impact biodiversity and ecosystem security. Firstly, toxins that are produced by GM plants to deter pests will kill or harm pests and non target organisms in much the same way as traditional pesticides. This could result in collapse of local food chains, and subsequent extinction of species including birds and insects. Secondly, genes from GM plants can migrate into conventional crops or closely related wild species can occur via outcrossing. Although minimum distances between GM and non GM crops have been enacted in many countries, this is often not enough to prevent cross pollination and subsequent hybridisation, meaning that the engineered genes may be introduced into the wild populations. Questions are also raised over the ethics and practicalities of inadvertent introduction of GMOs into countries that are receiving food aid or agricultural aid from countries that permit GMOs. In general, there is importance of reliable food labelling, and scope for consumer choice. 4

5 GMOs are not limited to GM crops. Livestock have been genetically modified, for example cows that produce milk with similar properties to human breast milk, goats that produce milk containing strong silk proteins, and the AquAdvantage salmon. This is the first GM animal approved for human consumption in the US, however its import is currently banned until the FDA makes labelling of GM products mandatory. It is an Atlantic salmon with a Chinook salmon gene and an ocean pout promoter region inserted, allowing for year round growth hormone production, faster growth (18 months to reach market size, as opposed to months for wild salmon), and ability to survive near freezing temperatures with continued development. From an ethical standpoint, genetically modifying animals may be crossing a line for some, however perhaps genetically modifying livestock to be more productive will limit the number of livestock that have to be bred and utilised to meet demand. Additionally, livestock that more efficiently convert feed to usable product (eg meat, milk, eggs etc) reduce the amount of feed required, thus the area of land required to grow that feed is also reduced. Overall, the issue is highly contentious, and views differ massively depending on geographical location. It is a topic that is often misrepresented by the media, and skewed in public perception, so perhaps the solution is to improve education, regardless of stance, so that consumers and voters can make informed decisions. Major Countries and Organisations Involved: WHO - World Health Organisation (Food Safety Department). Work with UN Food and Agriculture Organisation to provide member states with sound scientific advice on GM foods. FAO - Food and Agriculture Organisation. UN Agency with 194 member states, leading international efforts to combat world hunger. EU - European Union. Imposes strict regulations on GMOs, requiring all GMO crops to undergo centralised premarket approval, involving evaluation by EFSA, with those granted authorisation reassessed every 10 years, and assigned a unique identifier to ensure traceability and allow consumers to make informed choices. It also allows individual member states to ban individual varieties, and to establish their own coexistence regulations. 5

6 EFSA - European Food Safety Authority. EU agency providing independent scientific advice on matters involving the safety of food and the food chain. Evaluate GMOs case by case according to safety, freedom of choice, labelling, and traceability. This includes a risk assessment involving molecular characterisation, potential toxicity, and potential environmental impact, so that it is safe for human and animal health and the environment under its intended conditions of use. USA - United States of America. Does not impose any regulator measures specific to GMOs. As outlined by the Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology, products should be just according to the final product rather than the process by which they were made, so GMOs are regulated according to the same health, safety, and environmental legislation that governs conventional products. Timeline of Events: Date: 1980 Event: First patent on a living organism (a bacterium that can digest crude oil, eg after oil spills), after Diamond v Chakrabarty Supreme Court Case. Date: 1982 Event: First GMO approved by FDA (insulin produced by GM E. coli bacteria) Date: 1986 Event: USA proposed Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology, in which regulatory measures overlook the methods used to produce foods (eg genetic engineering), and instead focuses on the final product, so GMOs do not require further approval. Date: 1992 Event: First GMO product on market (Zeneca s Flavr Savr GM tomato, which has delayed ripening so a longer shelf life). Date: 1996 Event: First commercial cultivation of Monsanto s GM soy in USA, engineered to be resistant to Monsanto herbicide RoundUp. Initially, imported to the EU, where it is sold unlabelled and mixed with non-gm soy. Date: 1997 Event: Protests against GM soy and tomato paste imports in UK, including backlash from Greenpeace. 6

7 Date: 1997 Event: EU Novel Food Regulation comes into force, meaning that GM foods must be labelled and assessed for safety. Date: 1998 Event: Commercialisation of Rainbow Papaya, a transgenic crop that is resistant to papaya ringspot virus, which had previously decimated papaya yields. Date: 1999 Event: Over 100 million acres worldwide planted with GM seeds. Date: 1999 Event: France, Italy, Greece, Denmark and Luxembourg declare moratorium on GM crops. In response, USA pressures EU to break moratorium. Date: 2000 Event: Herbicide resistant superweeds become problem for US farmers growing herbicide-tolerant GM crops. Date: 2003 Event: Caterpillars found to have evolved resistance to toxin produced by GM cotton plants in USA. Date: 2004 Event: Results of UK farm scale trials of GMOs (maize, oilseed rape, and sugar beet) published, revealing harm to wildlife for the growth of GM oilseed rape and sugar beet. Date: 2004 Event: GM crops produced by Syngenta and Monsanto become first approvals for import to EU since Date: 2007 Event: Scottish Government adopts GM free policy Date: 2007 Event: UK government begins attempt to bring GM crops back to Britain. Date: 2009 Event: Welsh Assembly Government commits to maximising restrictions on cultivation of GM crops. Date: 2010 Event: European Commission approves cultivation of BASF Amflora GM potato. Date: 2010 Event: EU debates proposals to allow member states to ban GM crops, while also speeding up the centralised GM crop approval process. 7

8 Date: 2011 Event: EU allows low levels of unauthorised GM crops to enter animal feed. Date: 2014 Event: Some Hawaiian counties ban cultivation and open air testing of GMOs. Date: 2016 Event: US President Barack Obama signs bill requiring labelling for food containing GMOs, however some argue the labelling is inadequate (eg can be QR code) Date: 2016 Event: Russia bans cultivation and breeding of genetically engineered crops and animals. Date: 2016 Event: Federal judge ruled that individual counties in Hawaii can t enact their own bans or regulations on GMOs, following a fight by agricultural companies to remove localised regulations. Relevant UN Treaties and Events: Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety UN Statement Regarding the use of GM Foods as Food Aid in Southern Africa UN Economic and Social Council: Draft Guidelines on Access to Information, Public Participation and Access to Justice with Respect to Genetically Modified Organisms UN Environmental Programme: Regulation of Biotechnology: Needs and burdens for developing countries Possible Solutions: Approaches to GMOs vary massively across the world, with stark contrasts between the highly regulated EU, and the much less regulated USA and Brazil. In forming a resolution, some countries may opt for localised, national decision making, with individual countries able to decide the extent to which GMOs are cultivated and imported, and under what regulations. Some may opt for global deregulation of GMOs, under the principle that GMOs are no more inherently risky than classically bred organisms, and so organisms should be judged by the final product rather than the process of getting there, or similarly that cisgenic GMOs should be legislated in the same way as conventional food products. Some countries may opt for increased global regulation of GMOs, for example under the precautionary principle, or even a ban. 8

9 In general, more research should be done on GMOs particularly concerning long term environmental effects. It may be beneficial for this research to be conducted with international cooperative research groups as opposed to private companies, as this may ensure that the motive is reducing world hunger and/or benefitting the environment, as opposed to profit. (For example, the research and cultivation of the rainbow papaya.) With the advent of CRISPR - Cas9, the methods of genetic engineering became much more practically accessible to the general public. Although some view this as a positive, it does raise the question of an increased risk of bioterrorism. It may be necessary to regulate who can have access to these technologies, however the practicalities of this may be limited. Education about GMOs should be improved, as currently many people s views of GMOs is formed through media, which is often skewed in one direction or another. This allows consumers and voters to make more informed decisions, and allows decisions to be made based on scientific evidence and practicality as opposed to public perception. The examples described in this report do not cover anywhere close to the full diversity of possible applications, benefits, and risks. Different countries may be more affected by or invested in certain angles. Bibliography: UK Parliament: Science and Technology Committee - Fifth Report Advanced genetic techniques for crop improvement: regulation, risk and precaution Genetic Literacy Project: Where are GMOs grown and banned? World Health Organisation Food Safety Department: Food Technologies. Food and Agriculture Organisation: Weighing the GMO arguments: against. 9

10 Food and Agriculture Organisation: GMOs and the environment United Nations University: Are Transgenic Crops Safe? GM Agriculture in Africa UN Economic and Social Council: Draft Guidelines on Access to Information, Public Participation and Access to Justice with Respect to Genetically Modified Organisms United Nations Environmental Programme: Regulation of Biotechnology: Needs and burdens for developing countries United Nations Environmental Programme: Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety Biology Fortified: The Man Behind the Rainbow Papaya 10