23.01.2015 Views

Hope Not Hype - Third World Network

Hope Not Hype - Third World Network

Hope Not Hype - Third World Network

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

42 <strong>Hope</strong> <strong>Not</strong> <strong>Hype</strong><br />

Regulations cannot ensure the safety of unknown or recalled GMOs in human food.<br />

The case study reported in Box 4.1 describes how unknown varieties can result in human<br />

health concerns and trade disruptions (Heinemann et al., 2004). In summary:<br />

The movement of transgenes beyond their intended destinations is a virtual certainty. It is<br />

unlikely that transgenes can be retracted once they have escaped. Human error can foil even<br />

the best designed strategies for risk management (Marvier and Van Acker, 2005, p. 99).<br />

<strong>Not</strong> all GMOs are intended to be safe as food (Ellstrand, 2003; Heinemann, 2007;<br />

Marvier and Van Acker, 2005; Schubert, 2008). The track record on containing regulated<br />

and potentially unsafe GMOs, much less GMOs not designed to be safe, is not reassuring<br />

(Fox, 2003; Ledford, 2007; Lee and Natesan, 2006; Vermij, 2006; Zapiola et al., 2008)<br />

and thus, even when regulatory requirements are met, it is possible for future potentially<br />

“unsafe” GMOs to enter the food chain (Schubert, 2008). This is the point elegantly made<br />

by the editor of Nature Biotechnology when discussing so-called “pharma crops”, GM<br />

food plants that produce industrial or pharmaceutical products that are not intended to be<br />

safe in food:<br />

The production of drugs or drug intermediates in food or feed crop species bears the potential<br />

danger that pharmaceutical substances could find their way into the food chain through<br />

grain admixture, or pollen-borne gene flow (in maize, at least) or some other accidental<br />

mix-up because of the excusably human inability to distinguish between crops for food and<br />

crops for drugs. The ‘contamination’ of soybeans and non-GM corn in 2002 with a corn<br />

engineered by Prodigene to produce an experimental pig vaccine shows just how plausible<br />

this is. This position is not anti-GM (something industry should appreciate) – we should be<br />

concerned about the presence of a potentially toxic substance in food plants. After all, is this<br />

really so different from a conventional pharmaceutical or biopharmaceutical manufacturer<br />

packaging its pills in candy wrappers or flour bags or storing its compounds or production<br />

batches untended outside the perimeter fence (Editor, 2004, p. 133)...Although industry<br />

organizations, such as the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), continue to support<br />

The Assessment text<br />

Synthesis Report (p. 42)<br />

GMOs made from plants that are part of<br />

the human food supply but developed<br />

for animal feed or to produce<br />

pharmaceuticals that would be unsafe as<br />

food, might threaten human health.<br />

(From Agriculture at a Crossroads: The<br />

Synthesis Report by IAASTD, ed.<br />

Copyright © 2009 IAASTD. Reproduced<br />

by permission of Island Press,<br />

Washington, D.C.)<br />

food crops for PMP/PMIP [plant-made<br />

pharmaceuticals and plant-made industrial<br />

products] expression systems, we hold to<br />

our original view that they pose too many<br />

problems (Editor, 2007, p. 167).<br />

A related reason to consider presence<br />

comes from differences in the context of<br />

safety testing and actual use of a GMO. A<br />

GMO that is by design substantially<br />

different from the same conventional<br />

organism may be deemed safe in one context<br />

but pose risks in another. An example of<br />

such a case is provided by a GM variety of

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!