GMO Myths and Truths

acute allergenicity problems to a large portion of
the population.
3.7.3. Studies on GM foods confirm
existing allergy assessments are
inadequate
Studies on GM foods confirm that current
allergy assessments are inadequate to detect
new allergens created by the genetic engineering
process.
In a study on mice fed GM peas containing an
insecticidal protein from beans (see 3.1.1), mice
showed antibody immune reactions and allergictype
inflammatory responses to the GM protein
and chicken egg white protein when it was fed to
them with the GM peas.
The mice did not show antibody immune
reactions and allergic-type inflammatory
responses to beans that naturally contain the
insecticidal protein or to egg white protein when
it was fed with the natural insecticidal protein
obtained from beans. They also did not have an
immune response to the egg white protein when it
was fed on its own.
These outcomes show that the GM insecticidal
protein made the mice more susceptible to
developing allergic-type inflammatory reactions
to foods eaten with the GM food. This is called
immunological cross-priming.
The results indicated that the reaction of the
mice to the GM peas was caused by changes
brought about by the genetic engineering process.
The normally non-immunogenic and nonallergenic
insecticidal protein naturally produced
in beans was altered in structure and/or function
when engineered into peas, becoming a potent
immunogen (substance that produces an immune
response) and allergen. 4
It is important to note that this study was not
required by regulators, but was carried out as part
of the developer’s voluntary research programme.
The allergenicity of the GM peas would likely not
have been spotted by the EU’s screening process
because the natural, non-GM version of the bean
insecticidal protein is not a known allergen.
Because of this, blood serum from sensitised
individuals would not have been available for
regulatory serum tests.
Overall, the study shows that GM foods can
contain new allergens and cause new allergic
reactions – and that the GMO’s allergenicity is
unlikely to be detected using the current allergy
assessment process.
Two other studies confirm the inadequacy of
the current allergy assessment process:
● A study on a commercialised GM insecticidal
maize, MON810, showed that the GM plant’s
proteins were markedly altered compared with
those in the non-GM counterpart. Unexpected
changes included the appearance of a new form
of the protein zein, a known allergen, which
was not present in the non-GM maize variety.
A number of other proteins were present in
both their natural forms and in truncated and
lower molecular mass forms. 111 The findings
suggest major disruptions in gene structure
and function in this GM crop. The EU’s allergy
assessment failed to pick up these changes
and failed to detect the presence of the newly
created allergen.
● A GM soy variety modified with a gene from
Brazil nuts was found to be capable of producing
an allergic reaction in people who are allergic
to Brazil nuts. The researchers had genetically
engineered the Brazil nut gene into the soy in
order to increase its nutritional value. When
they tested the effect of this GM soy on blood
serum from people allergic to Brazil nuts, they
found that the serum produced an allergic
response to the soy. Through scratch tests on
skin, they confirmed that people allergic to Brazil
nuts were allergic to the modified soybean. 64
This study is often cited by GM proponents
as evidence of the effectiveness of regulatory
processes in identifying allergenic foods before
they reach the marketplace. But this is untrue.
Tests such as this are not required to be carried
out as part of the regulatory assessment of GM
foods in any country.
3.7.4. Conclusion
The absence of reliable methods for allergenicity
testing and the lack of rigour in current allergy
assessments mean that it is impossible to reliably
predict whether a GM crop will prove to be
allergenic.
GMO Myths and Truths 55