Can Food Biotechnology Feed the World?

Transcription

1 Can Food Biotechnology Feed the World? by Ho Wei Ling Climate change, population explosion, shrinking arable land and rapid urbanization these are some of the reasons that the world is gradually looking towards biotechnology to meet its growing demand for food. But worldwide, prolific and vocal campaigning by anti-biotechnology activist groups are putting a brake on the development of food biotechnology. Dr George Fuller, Executive Director of the Asian Food Information Center (AFIC), identifies and discusses the key challenges facing the development of food biotechnology in Asia. As a science communicator, Dr Fuller also puts things into perspective and explains why controversies surrounding food biotechnology will lose their ground. Volume 13 > Number 8 >

2 APBN: What motivated you to make a switch from Chemistry to Bioorganic chemistry during your academic days? What does the discipline Bio-organic chemistry encompass? George Fuller: Firstly, let s define what makes a generalist and a specialist. A specialist is somebody who knows more and more about less and less of something and tells you absolutely everything about nothing. A generalist is somebody who knows less and less about more and more and tells you absolutely nothing about everything. I specialize in being a generalist. I am receptive to new ideas and concepts. I see links where not everybody else could. Organic chemistry is a discipline within chemistry which basically studies the structure of carbon molecules, whereas bioorganic chemistry is a segment of that discipline which looks at molecules and important life bioprocesses. In the early days when I was in the graduate school, not much is known about biology at molecular level, hence, this is the advent of a new, rapidly growing discipline which is a fusion of molecular biology. important highlights in your professional career? George Fuller: I got into agriculture with a particular focus in pest control, organic chemicals and exploring the possibilities for safe production. It s not easy to feed all the people on the planet, and it gets harder everyday. So, what I want to do and could do is to make food production work better an area that I am very passionate about. My experience in the first part of my career involved agriculture, production and pest control and the second half of my career with Monsato Company was in biotechnology. When I got into biotechnology, I gravitated towards Asia, because Asia struck me as the region in the world where biotechnology has the potential to make the most impact in food production, and people from this region has a higher conscientiousness that food does not come from grocery stores, they recognize the notion that food is something that you have to work to get. That was what attracted me to Asia. In my most recent projects, I am moving closer to the consumers. Food chain, production, agriculture, commodities, distribution, processing, and retailing do not exist as independent, disconnected segments, they are in fact continuous. So, I move up along the continuum to embark on another fascinating aspect of food. S c i e n t i s t s a r e n o t g o o d a t communication. Interestingly, as a scientist too, I see myself as a translator for scientists. Communicating science in a manner that the public could understand is not easy. Scientists will always say, You know what? The public will probably not going to accept this because they are not educated enough to understand. Now, that perception is absolutely wrong. The public actually knows more than the scientists, in terms of how people react to things. The question is not about educating the public, the question is essentially about how to educate scientists in disseminating what is important to the public. I try to work both ways. I help scientists understand what is important to the public, and also help the public give scientists the information and input that contains scientific basis to be understood by the scientists. APBN: You made a transition from CropLife Asia to AFIC. Why the move and what are the learnings and experiences you bring from CropLife Asia into AFIC? George Fuller: As mentioned earlier, I am moving along the continuum of the food chain from production and then closer to the retail end. What I bring on board are experiences in managing the organization, and I have wide exposure in terms of dealing with many more companies and handling various issues of the food industry. On the other hand, I am still learning the ropes on other aspects. 20 Volume 13 > Number 8 >

3 APBN: Briefly outline the establishment of the Asian Food Information Center (AFIC). George Fuller: Founded and registered in Singapore in 1998, Asian Food Information Center (AFIC) reaches out to the media, scientific community, health professionals, g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s, f o o d manufacturers, health educators and the general public by communicating sound, science-based information on food safety, health and nutrition to them. In terms of collaborating parties, we work with many experts in different governments. We have maintained a database of experts from the academia on different issues. We also have a Memorandum of Understanding signed with the National Food Institute in Thailand to initiate collaboration. We are certainly open to other institutions from Singapore. There are a variety of companies in environmental and food protection that go the entire length of the food production spectrum, not just segments. That reinforces my conviction that the food industry is a continuum, not just discrete segments. APBN: Is AFIC an Asian version of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization in terms of the role it plays? Where does AFIC get its funding? George Fuller: No, we are not. Instead, we are the Asian version of the International Food Information Center, which we are not formally linked to but are associated with them. There is also a Center in Europe. AFIC gets its funding from companies in the food and agricultural industries ranging from food production to retailing. We are not an advocacy agency. We don t advocate policies and we play no role in endorsing or lobbying on behalf of industry or the products. We advocate science congruency and information. Even these companies has common policy agenda, they share the common belief that their information should be science-based. APBN: Since taking helm at AFIC late last year, what are some of the new directives or initiatives you have implemented? George Fuller: It s not so much about setting new direction, but shoring up the foundation. The organization needs to execute the basic functions better, and we are carrying out work to dramatically improve the website and media management. We try to make our information more consumer-friendly. Where, in the past, presentation of information was too technical and scientific, we attempt to add value and be more scientifically balanced by presenting in the form that consumers can understand. APBN: What is the role that food biotechnology can play for future food supply in Asia? George Fuller: I will give my personal opinion which in fact, has some scientific basis for it. It will be impossible to meet the growing food demands of the population in the world without food biotechnology. Food biotechnology will as an important equation contribute to the numbers and solutions to food supply. For people who arbitrarily say that we can t use biotechnology, it just does not make any sense. To give you an analogy, it s like saying I am not going to bring an umbrella with me to rain-prone Singapore just because I don t like umbrellas, in that case, how would you not get wet when it rains? That simply does not make any sense! opportunities for food biotechnology in Asia? George Fuller: There are lots of opportunities. I am not an expert in this area, but I can tell you a lot of very excellent research have been done in the institutes of many Asian countries. The problem falls in a lack of funding and skills base to advance these technologies to get to where it should be. We have a huge reservoir of tools out there, which have not been fully tapped and developed. People are struggling with that problem to deal with what can be done. The private sectors are already there, and there are (biotech) food stocks on the shelves, there could be resistance from the (public) sector that results in not being deployed effectively due to political constraints. benefits of food biotechnology? Name a few food examples that are engineered by biotechnological means. George Fuller: To me, the major benefit of food biotechnology is increased productivity. Some of the benefits shown in insect-protected corns contain lower level of toxins and higher nutrient content, making it healthier for consumers. There Volume 13 > Number 8 >

4 are other biotech products with increased nutrients profiles such as the Golden Rice which creates huge impact. People are dying every year from malnutrition. Adding nutrients into the food as part of the food does not cost much money and it saves people s lives. APBN: Is Golden Rice available yet? George Fuller: Due in part to technical hurdles, political issues and public resistance, Golden Rice is not tested for commercialization yet. APBN: Might be the resistance against food biotechnology lower in Asia than in Europe? George Fuller: We don t know yet, as it has not really been tested. You can anticipate violent protests from the anti-biotechnology activists community. Protests from the activists are not necessarily a mirror of consumers acceptance. Your statement could be correct. In fact, if you look at the survey we conducted among consumers in Asia last year, we found the resistance to biotechnology in countries such as Japan, Korea, which import most of their food, is higher compared to countries where agriculture is important such as China, India and Philippines. The level of acceptance for food biotechnology in China, India and the Philippines is much higher than you would have read in the press or media. APBN: Talk about resistance, what are some of the commonly held misconceptions about biotech food? George Fuller: I have yet to see a concern on safety-related issues about the technology. Every day, people are coming up with new unfounded claims about biotech food. People just bring them up. Such is human nature the supply of questions is always greater than the supply of answers. The strategy of the opponents is to continue raising questions. And once questions triumph over answers, they would figure that you can t go for it until you have all the answers to the questions. That is going to happen. My fear is we do not know the longterm effects of biotechnology. But, how long is considered long-term? Biotech food has been around for 15 years, is that long-term? I do not know any other products that has been tested for 15 years. biosafety-related issues for biotech food? George Fuller: If you take a closer look, the issues we deal with are no difference with that of conventional food. It boils down to the same basic stuff if we go back to the first principles health concerns of what you put inside your mouth and the impact on the environment.. Earlier on in many debates, when the politics about biotech food came in, countries like the U.S. take a very scientific approach. The lobbyists think we already have laws on food safety, and we also have laws that look at the environmental impact, so which existing law should regulate this material? Almost every countries in the world think biotech food must be something special that new laws have to be made and new criteria to be set. That triggered the start of a new direction creating the impression that biotech food requires special law. In fact, food being food, biotech food is really simply basic stuff. If you add something into it, you have to make sure that it is going to be safe, likewise if you alter it. Even in the U.S., getting approval is a high hurdle to clear. That is not a scientifically valid approach. But, it is important for the public to understand and not to regard biotech food as some kind of experiment. In fact, I would agree with some scientists in the Europe Union who consider biotech food to be safer than conventional food because conventional food has not been tested yearly compared to biotech food. regulatory policies governing biotechnology food products and information food labels in Asia? George Fuller: The regulatory policies are still under development. The countries that allow cultivation of biotech food are China, India and the Philippines. At this point, I believe China has mandatory labeling, and certainly Japan, Korea, New Zealand, and Australia too. Whereas in India, there are some consideration to do so but Philippines does not. challenges in the development of food biotechnology in Asia? George Fuller: The major issue is seen as political. I think, in Asia, technical capability is in abundance which is not an issue. However, getting people to be comfortable with making choices and regulatory decisions in the midst of controversy 22 Volume 13 > Number 8 >

5 is far more difficult in Asian countries than in other region. Many Asian countries are not comfortable with controversies. The instinct is to hold back rather than to move forward, which makes the anti-biotechnology activists job very easy. They just make controversies and they win! new trends in food biotechnology that you envision in the coming decades? George Fuller: The only limitation is your imagination. In fact, anything that can possibly be influenced by the biological system could be achieved by biotechnology. Photo Credit: The Pinnacle Group International Dr George Fuller Executive Director, Asian Food Information Center (AFIC) A native of St. Louis, Missouri, Dr Fuller received his bachelor degree in Chemistry from Macalester College, his Master s degree from the University of California, Berkeley and his Ph.D. in bioorganic chemistry from the University of British Columbia. After doing postdoctoral work at the University of Alberta and Yale University, Dr Fuller joined the Uniroyal Agricultural Products Company in He joined Monsanto Company in 1982 and worked in a variety of positions relating to international regulatory approvals of crop protection and biotechnology products. From 1997 through 2002, he concentrated on regulatory acceptance of biotechnology in the Asia-Pacific region. Dr Fuller retired from Monsanto at the end of 2002 and became the Executive Director of CropLife Asia, which is based in Bangkok. As Executive Director, he oversaw the strategic planning and operations of the association in the areas of product stewardship, regulatory policy, biotechnology acceptance and communications. He worked in this position through October 2008 when he left to become Executive Director of the Asian Food Information Center (AFIC). AFIC is a trusted, science-based resource on nutrition, health and food safety for the Asian region. g Volume 13 > Number 8 >