Biotech Foods: Communicating Risks and Benefits to the Public

Transcription

1 Biotech Foods: Communicating Risks and Benefits to the Public Judith A. Kjelstrom, PhD Acting Director, Biotechnology Program Lecturer in Microbiology & MCB (Mol. Biology) University of California, Davis October 23, /1/2010 1

2 Welcome. Norwegian Research Council and the Norwegian Trade Council (NTC) Study Tour on Novel Foods: Functional Foods, Nutraceuticals, GM Foods The public is confused by the media coverage on genetically-modified (biotech) crops? What are the Issues? What exactly are GMOs? Are they Safe to Eat? Are they Safe for the Environment? Who makes sure that they are safe? 10/1/2010 2

3

4 We Need Public Involvement We need to produce a safe, nutritious and sufficient food supply. We need to grow food in an environmentally responsible fashion. We must maintain factual and open public discourse on the impact of biotechnology and other technologies on the world. The public needs to know that research done at land grant universities is critical to the evaluation process. We must define the role agricultural biotechnology will play in society. 10/1/2010 4

5 US CONSUMERS KNOWLEDGE ABOUT GM FOODS STILL LOW September 18, 2003: The Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology survey- which showed that, after two years, US consumers knowledge about genetically modified (GM) food are still low, and their perceptions about their safety are still divided. The survey findings also showed that having the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) review and approve GM products increases US consumers confidence about GM food. The major findings of the survey are as follows: 34% of US consumers have heard a great deal about GM food (a 10 point decline in 2001s percentage of 44%). 24% of consumers say that they have eaten GM foods, while 58% believe that they have not. This is despite estimates that 70 to 75% of processed food in the groceries contains GM food. 64% of consumers oppose a ban on GM foods, but are strongly supportive of a regulatory process that directly involves the FDA. And 89% believe that GM foods should be placed in the market only after the FDA has determined its safety. 58% of consumers polled oppose the genetic modification of animals, and were comfortable with the use of the science in the improvement of plants. Medical and personal safety issues are the most widely accepted uses of genetic modifications. The survey report can be downloaded at 10/1/2010 Also in Sac. Bee, Sept 18,

6 Public Communicators must: Present Sound Science (based on peer reviewed research). Be a Trusted Source of information on Ag Biotech (current surveys show that university scientists, medical professionals, FDA and farmers are trusted in U.S.). Use language and examples that are appropriate to the audience. BE USER FRIENDLY! Share information without trying to persuade. Explain the regulatory oversight process to assure safety. Be open about possible risks but also list the benefits. Be respectful and sensitive to the concerns of the public. Listen Actively! Follow-up with Resources for Continued Dialogue. 10/1/2010 6

7 Communicate, Communicate, Communicate. Communication needs to be an ongoing two way interaction with the various interested parties, not just a reactive information practice in case of need: Proactive agenda setting Providing information Transferring convictions Shaping perceptions Learn from the Past There are no simple solutions to complex issues Every new technology needs a gestation time Length of time depends on intensity of public debate Per Martina Newell McGloughlin 10/1/2010 7

8 EFFECTIVE EDUCATION Educational efforts can facilitate acceptance of biotechnology Thomas Hoban, 1997 Success in US due to consistent and proactive educational efforts. Partnerships between universities, industry, agencies, & organizations. Education must be based on assessment of public knowledge and attitudes To reach consumers educate opinion leaders: Scientists; health experts; teachers; government officials; the media; and food industry Messages: Benefits and uses of Agricultural Biotechnology, historical context, and government oversight to assure safety. 10/1/2010 8

9 What are the Issues? Biotechnology vs.traditional Breeding Methods Food Safety Environmental Social 10/1/2010 9

10 Agricultural Biotechnology is a promising new area of crop science. Decrease use of chemicals on farmland. Enhanced pest and disease resistance. Increased stress tolerance: drought, salinity, cold, etc. Improved vitamin and micronutrient composition. Pharming to make vaccines and therapeutics. 10/1/

11 What will be the future of Biotech Crops? Ghandi once said: Honest disagreement is often a sign of progress. It is critical to discuss both sides of this issue. But, it is imperative that the science behind the GM crops is shared, so that fear can be diminished as to Safety for Consumption & Safety for the Environment 10/1/

12 Biotechnology or Bioengineering is generally defined as: The use of living organisms, or parts thereof, to provide useful products, processes and services. PRODUCT: Golden Rice - insertion of genes for beta-carotene (pro-vitamin A) production into white rice. (Ag Biotech) PROCESS: Microbes manufacturing chymosin (rennin) for cheese production. (Industrial Biotech) SERVICE: Genetically engineered poplar trees for cleaning up heavy metal contamination of land and water. (Bioremediation) 10/1/

13 Let s Explore this DNA Technology, in order to Increase our Understanding! Some may say that these techniques are revolutionary, but in actuality they are just the outgrowth of our collected knowledge of: Traditional Breeding to create new crop varieties DNA Structure - universal code of LIFE The Central Dogma: DNA mrna Protein Genetic Recombination in Bacteria: Transformation, Transduction & Conjugation 10/1/

14 Farmers have been Moving Genes (DNA) for Centuries. It must emphasized that our ancestors have been improving our crops and livestock for centuries through selective breeding or crossbreeding to produce desired traits (encoded by genes). Biotechnology is just an extension of this work. It is just a more precise method. Genes can be added, deleted or temporarily silenced. Scientists who use genetic engineering to move DNA from one plant or microbe to another plant have the same goal as traditional breeders Make the food supply safer for consumers and the environment Make the food supply less expensive for the consumer 10/1/

15 Example of a wide cross in Traditional Plant Breeding Lycopersicon esculentum Lycopersicon peruvianum Cultivar Wild Parent Per George Bruening and subsequent back-cross series Result: tomato cultivar bearing valued genes from the wild parent 10/1/2010 (e.g., nematode resistance, virus resistance) 15

16 Chromosomes in a wide cross (simplified) Cultivar parent Wild parent Conventional Breeding takes a lot of crosses to reduce unwanted wild type genes. May take 10 years! Per George Bruening 10/1/

17 Base Pairing Rules: DNA is a double stranded helix of sugars, phosphates, & Bases (A, T, C, G) The simplicity and universality of this molecule in all living species allows for genetic engineering to occur. A = T G C G C A = T T = A C G T = A G C A = T 10/1/

18 What is Genetic Engineering? DNA is the information molecule for all living things It involves cutting and moving snippets of DNA (genes for a specific desirable traits) from one plant, animal or microbe to another. Unlike traditional crossbreeding, only one or a few genes are introduced into the host species. Therefore, unwanted traits are usually avoided. 10/1/

19 Genetic Engineering enhances the process of Conventional Selective Breeding: It is faster, more precise and doesn t require sexual compatibility 10/1/

20 When? Why? Who? Cheese was the first food product of biotechnology. The enzyme Chymosin (bioengineered rennin) appeared on the market in By 1995, other biotech crops (GMOs) were developed to delay ripening (Flavr Savr Tomato) or reduce crop damage by weeds, diseases and insects. In 2002, an estimated 6 million farmers grew biotech crops on 145 million acres in 15 countries (led by the United States, Canada and Argentina). Soybeans, cotton, canola and corn (maize) are the major biotech crops planted. 10/1/

21 How Much? About % of all processed foods now contain at least one ingredient from a genetically engineered plant. In 2003, More than 80% of soybeans, 40% of the corn crop and 70% of the cotton crop in the U.S. was engineered for pest/weed control. Biotech disease-resistant papaya and squash are available. Biotech varieties of potato, tomato, rice, flax, sugar beet, sweet corn, melon and radicchio are approved for use in the U.S. but are not currently on the market. 10/1/

22 Dairy and Meat Products More than 70 percent of cheese on the U.S. market is made with a genetically engineered enzyme (chymosin). Milk commonly is obtained from cows treated with a biotech growth hormone (rbst) in order to increase milk production. Livestock routinely eat feed made from biotech crops. No genetically engineered fish, cows, pigs, sheep, chickens or other food animals are on the market as of /1/

23 Potential Benefits and Goals Safer food supply for consumers Less impact on the environment Less expensive food production Crops less vulnerable to insects, diseases, weeds and harsh environments Create Crops with more nutrients Use Crops for new materials and energy sources Develop Crops as production vehicles for medicines and vaccines to prevent disease 10/1/

24 Golden Rice High Provitamin A ( carotene) rice is a major advance for plant biotechnology and focuses international attention on the metabolic engineering of output traits. Picture of Ingo Potrykus 10/1/

25 Increased -Carotene in Rice Grains Over 120 million children worldwide are deficient in vitamin A. Rice has been engineered to accumulate -carotene, which is converted to vitamin A in the body. Incorporation of this trait into rice cultivars and widespread distribution could prevent 1 to 2 million deaths each year. Introduced enzyme (source) (daffodil) (bacteria) (daffodil) Ye et al. (2000) Science 287: Normal rice Golden rice 10/1/

26 Prof. Eduardo Blumwald (UC Davis) & Zhang s Work Have gene Transgenic tomatoes in 5mM (A) and 200mM (B) of NaCl Salt Tolerant Tomatoes May Hold the Key to Growing Crops in Marginal Soils (and may even reclaim salt from the topsoil) 24.7 million acres (1/5 of California)-- of once agriculturally productive land are being lost annually because of irrigation-induced salinity (USDA). Crop production is limited by salinity on 40 % world's irrigated land and on 25 % USA. Blumwald and Zhang genetically engineered tomato plants that produce higher levels of a sodium transport protein." The control gene was taken from Arabidopsis. Plants grow and produce fruit even in irrigation water that is > 50X saltier than normal. Nature Biotechnology, Aug /1/

27 Zhang & Blumwald s tomatoes Transgenics survive high salt 10/1/

28 Are GMO s Safe to Eat? Read - Agricultural Biotechnology: What are the Issues? Created by the CA&ES at UC Davis and other US Land Grant Universities, in cooperation with the UCD Biotechnology Program. (brochure & power point talk) Link on the Biotech Program website: Or contact Dr. Kjelstrom 10/1/

29 Safety Regulators in the U.S. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Determines if it is Safe to Grow U.S. Food and Drug Administration ( FDA) Determines if it is Safe to Eat Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Determines if it is Safe for the Environment These agencies work with university scientists and other individuals to develop data to ensure these regulations are based on sound science. 10/1/

30 APHIS Oversees Field Trials Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is the branch of the USDA responsible for protecting U.S. agriculture from pests and diseases. GM insects and plants are potentially invasive so they are treated as plant pest. APHIS provides permits for the development and field testing of GM plants. Several years of field testing is needed to investigate everything: disease resistance; drought tolerance; reproductive rates; weed consequences; risks to wildlife and beneficial insects; etc, before deregulated status is granted. Precautions required for a full permit, especially GM crops that make industrial or pharmaceutical compounds: Planting site for transgenic crop must be at least one mile from where the nontransgenic crop is grown and harvested. A 25-foot perimeter of fallow land (unplanted, tilled soil) must surround the entire trial site field. Pollen must be contained to prevent pollination and flow (ex: bagged corn tassels) No plants can escape the field site.. All volunteers must be destroyed. Usually, the entire test field is kept fallow for the entire growing season. 10/1/

31 Potential risks being evaluated Farmworker and consumer safety Environmental effects on plants, animals and water systems Genes moving from genetically engineered crops into wild plants Pests eventually developing resistance to pest-resistant crops Introduction of allergy-causing compounds in foods 10/1/

32 Safety Evidence Raw potatoes can be poisonous due to glycoalkaloids (related to deadly nightshade) in skin. All available evidence to date shows that foods from biotech crops are as safe as foods from non-biotech crops. No Approved Biotech food has been recalled due to foodsafety issues. U.S. food supply is among the safest in the world. Remember: No food is 100 % Safe. Contamination & Spoilage remain the real safety issues. 10/1/

33 Are Approved Bioengineered Crops and Foods derived from them SAFE? The consensus of scientific opinion and evidence is that biotechnology-derived foods and feeds pose no new or unusual dangers to the environment or human health. FAO (United Nations Food and Ag Organization)/WHO , 7 National Academies of Science s Report (US, China, Royal Society of London, India, Mexico, Brazil and the Third World Academy) 2000 American Society of Microbiology 2000 American Medical Association 2001 US National Research Council report: Genetically Modified Pest- Protected Plants: Science and Regulation - it determined that no difference exists between crops modified through modern molecular techniques and those modified by conventional breeding practices. It was not aware of any evidence suggesting foods on the market today are unsafe to eat as a result of genetic modification. In fact, the scientific panel concluded that growing such crops could have environmental advantages over other crops. 10/1/

34 Are Approved Bioengineered Crops and Foods derived from them SAFE? Yes, we have over 10 years of testing. Over a BILLION people consume such foods on a regular basis. Not a single illness or death has been reported. All available evidence to date shows that food from biotech crops is as safe as food from non-biotech (conventional and organic) crops. There has never been a recall of any biotech food due to adverse affects to human or animal health. Actually, they are probably safer! BT* crops have lowered amounts of mycotoxins (toxic substances produced by fungi), due to the reduction of secondary fungal invasion of insect-damaged plants. BT-corn contains on average 90% less cancer-causing mycotoxins than non-gm corn (grown by organic or conventional methods). Most types of food processing do not affect mycotoxins. (Denver Publishing Co., July 6, 2003). *BT crops have a gene from the soil bacteria, Bacillus thuringiensis which codes for a natural insecticide. Organic farmers have dusted crops with it for many years. 10/1/

35 Even the EU has confirmed these findings of Biotech Crop Safety: Les plantes génétiquement modifiées "Genetically Modified Plants" (Académie des sciences 2003) called for an end to the European moratorium on genetically modified crops, as there is no demonstrated concern from a human health or environmental impact perspective. Royal Society of London confirms that the moratorium must be lifted, since the safety studies confirm no new health risks with GM crops An EU Commission Report (2001) that summarized biosafety research of 400 scientific teams from all 15 EU countries conducted over 15 years (at a cost of $65M- US dollars) stated that research on biotechnology-derived plants and derived products so far developed and marketed, following usual risk assessment procedures, has not shown any new risks to human health or the environment beyond the usual uncertainties of conventional plant breeding. Indeed, the use of more precise technology and the greater regulatory scrutiny probably make them even safer than conventional plants and foods. If there are unforeseen environmental effects - none have appeared as yet - these should be rapidly detected by existing monitoring systems. 10/1/

36 CAN DNA BE PASSED FROM GM FEED TO HUMANS OR LIVESTOCK? THIS IS A COMMON QUESTION: If this was true, all ruminant animals would have been overcome by large amounts of Plant DNA. All DNA fragments are broken down into nucleic acids, sugar and phosphate in the GI tract, before being absorbed into the bloodstream. (Einspanier, et.al Eur. Food Res. Technology) 10/1/

37 Kiwi Fruit (introduced into US in 1962), now causes allergy in 2% of population. It can be life threatening, in persons allergic to latex (due to antigenic cross-reactivity). Should we ban Kiwi Fruit? In contrast: Approved GM Foods are tested for possible allergenicity before release to consumers. 10/1/

38 ARS (USDA) Publication on Reduced Allergen Soybeans Researchers Eliot Herman, Rick Helm and collaborators have used biotechnology to turn off the gene for a protein that makes soybean seeds allergenic to some consumers. More detailed information on the research appears in this month's issue of Agricultural Research Magazine available at: p02/soy0902.htm 10/1/

39 STANDARDS FOR GM FOOD SAFETY CRUCIAL Food safety assessment is not just about science, but also about perceptions, concerns, and standards about how to assure safety states Joel Cohen and colleagues in a brief issued by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Hence, there is a need to assure capacity building for biotechnology and biosafety. Such competency will enable countries to conduct independent research and create sufficient infrastructure to allow scientifically defensible decisions regarding food safety issues colored by each countrys perceptions and circumstances. Food Safety and GM Crops: Implications for Developing Country Research, one in a series on Food Safety in Food Security and Food Trade, at 10/1/

40 Food Biotechnology: Benefits and Concerns 2002 American Society for Nutritional Sciences Article ( /02) - reprints $3.00 Authors: Michael Falk (falkm@isro.faseb.org); Bruce Chassy; Susan Harlander, Thomas Hoban, Martina Newell-McGloughlin (director of UCBREP & adjunct faculty in Plant Pathology at UCD) and Amin Aklaghi. Good review of the issues. Many references are cited. 10/1/

41 Do GM crops pose a risk to the Environment? Gene transfer poses risks, but so does traditional crossbreeding. Will GM crops spread from the field to become an environmental nuisance? Good stewardship (refugia, male sterility, removal of volunteers, etc.) and government regulations are needed to address the potential risks. 10/1/

42 Are Biotech Crops Safe for the Environment? GM crops unlikely to be Superweeds: Study (Crawley, M. J., et. al. Transgenic crops in natural habitats. Nature. 409: Feb Transgenic corn, sugarbeet, oilseed rape (canola) and potato (BT or herbicide tolerant) were planted by a team from Imperial College London. The four crops were planted in different habitats in 1990 and monitored over 10 years to see whether they were tougher or more invasive than non-modified counterparts. In no case were the GM plants found to be more invasive or more persistent than the non-gm varieties. 10/1/

43 Are Biotech Crops Safe for the Environment? Pesticide use is a major environmental concern. GM crops have reduced the use of pesticides, especially the more toxic ones like atrazine. In the U.S. (2001), 46 million pounds in reduced pesticide use due to planting of 8 GM crops. In addition, increased profitability and use of no-till agriculture (decreased soil erosion) were seen. Ref: In China, human pesticide poisonings are reduced by ~75% by the use of BT-cotton (Science. Vol.295: ). 10/1/

44 Are Biotech Crops Safe for the Environment? Resistance to Bt toxin surprisingly absent from pests (Nature Biotechnology, September 2003) Defying the expectations of scientists monitoring transgenic crops such as corn and cotton that produce insecticidal proteins derived from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), target insect pests have developed little or no resistance to Bt crops thus far, according to USDA-funded scientists. The diamondback moth is the only pest to have evolved resistance to Bt sprays used by organic growers, but no pest has evolved resistance to transgenic Bt crops in the field. The primary resistance-preventive measure that farmers who plant Bt crops are required to take is to set aside some acreage as refuges (refugia) on which they grow the same crop devoid of Bt. CSIRO Entomology in Australia has added an additional level of resistance management strategy: planting window; mandatory crop resisdue destruction; management of volunteer plants and thresholds for pest management. 10/1/

45 Web Sites for Information: A weekly summary of world developments in agri-biotech, produced by the Global Knowledge Center on Crop Biotechnology, International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), and CAB International. ( Essential Biosafety CD: (free). This CD-ROM offers comprehensive information about the safety of genetically modified crops. Second edition was released in Nov, Food Biotechnology: A Communication Guide to Improving Understanding is available! This Guide aims to raise awareness of this communications issue. Get your free CD by ing a request to knowledge.center@isaaa.org. International Food Information Council Foundation (IFIC) - choose Food Biotechnology link ( The Council for Biotechnology Education good website for basic information ( 10/1/

46 Biotechnology: The Tools to Forge a Better Tomorrow COMMUNITY UNIVERSITY UCD Biotechnology Program Central Unit of OVCR Founded in 1986 Administrative home for the DEB & ADP graduate programs, NSF and NIH Biotechnology Training Grants Links Academia to Biotechnology Industries & Gov t agencies Education Source for Students, Teachers, and Community Public Outreach efforts Summer Short Courses Train the Trainers (NSF grant) for CC & HS teachers Advisory committees for Biotech Programs at schools. 10/1/

47 October 2001 UCBREP Comes to UC Davis University of California Systemwide Biotechnology Research and Education Program (Multi-Campus Research Unit of the Office of the President) Funding & Educational Opportunities! Dr. Martina Newell-McGloughlin (past director of the UCDavis Biotechnology Program) is the new Director of Biotechnology for all UC campuses. Gussie Curran is Associate Director Co-located in the offices of the Dean of the Division of Biological 10/1/2010 Sciences with the UC Davis Biotech Program 47

48 We have been here before! We have recently advanced our knowledge of genetics to the point where we can manipulate life in a way never intended by nature. We must proceed with the utmost caution in the application of this new found knowledge. LUTHER BURBANK, /1/

49 Questions? For More information on Biotechnology, please contact: Judith A. Kjelstrom, PhD Acting Director UC Davis Biotechnology Program (530) biotech.ucdavis.edu 10/1/