Risks
And Concerns: Transgenic Crops
This
article was reprinted with permission from the Department
of Soil and Crop Sciences website at Colorado State
Univeristy. One of the webmasters considers it the best
treatment of the issue of trangenic food. Free of hype and scare
tactics it clearly states the issues. Please go to their
website for more interesting articles and informational
multimedia!
J.C.
Rat
Authors
forward: "We tried to sort out legitimate concerns
(gene flow to wild relatives, development of resistance
to BT, corporate control of agriculture) from concerns
for which there is little/no scientific basis (health
hazards of transgenic food, increases in antibiotic
resistance). Granted, our summarized treatment of some
of these issues tends to simplify complex questions,
and we plan to provide more detail in the future."
Demonstrators
at the recent World Trade Organization talks in Seattle
took to the streets to denounce transgenic crops as
dangerous "Frankenfoods" and attacks on facilities conducting
research on transgenic crops are occurring with increasing
frequency. Some people are clearly worried and frightened
by this new technology. What are the main concerns associated
with transgenic crops? And what are the real risks?
Is
eating food from transgenic crops a health hazard?
An experiment carried out in Scotland, where rats
fed for ten days on transgenic potatoes containing
a lectin gene from snowdrops appeared to develop
internal organ damage, is often cited in support
of this claim, although this particular study has
been widely criticized by other scientists as being
too small-scale and inconclusive (Ewen
and Pusztai 1999). Some transgenes may pose
human health risks when consumed: for example, a
project to insert a brazil nut protein gene into
soybean was halted when early tests showed that
people allergic to nuts reacted to the modified
soy products (Nordlee
et al. 1996). This demonstrates the need to
consider potential health effects in new transgenic
crops, but it also shows that proper testing can
identify risks. Although almost half the US soybean
crop, and a quarter of US corn, now consists of
transgenic varieties (which means that we have all
been eating transgenic food products for some time)
there is as yet no single case reported of anyone
suffering health effects as a result. For more information
see Kaeppler
2000 or Thompson
2000.
Can
antibiotic resistance genes used as markers in transgenic
crops be transferred to pathogenic bacteria?
The chain of events that would be necessary for
such a transfer is quite unlikely, and there is
no evidence that it occurs. However, in response
to concerns about this remote possibility scientists
are starting to use alternative marker genes in
transgenic plants, such as the GFP gene which makes
the plant fluoresce when placed under UV light.
A detailed 1998 report by the U.S. Food and Drug
Administrations on the use of antibiotic resistance
genes is available at
Kaeppler
2000.
Are
transgenic crops a threat to other organisms in
the environment? Bt corn, which contains a bacterial
gene enabling the plants to manufacture a substance
toxic to the larvae of butterflies and moths but
harmless to other organisms, has been a target of
criticism since a laboratory study published last
year showed that Bt corn pollen dusted onto milkweed
leaves was harmful to monarch butterfly larvae feeding
on them (Losey
et al. 1999). Follow-up studies have shown that
pollen from Bt corn rarely reaches toxic levels
on milkweed in the field even when monarch butterfly
larvae are feeding on plants adjacent to a corn
field (Strickland
1999). Planting Bt corn also greatly reduces
or eliminates the need for spraying with pesticides
which are far more damaging to non-target insect
populations.
Will
pollen from transgenic crops contaminate non-transgenic
crop varieties? More information is needed about
the extent of this risk for different crops. However,
a recently completed study at the University of
Maine found that cross-pollination of conventional
corn by transgenic corn grown in an adjacent plot
was 1% at a distance of 100 feet and declined to
zero at a distance of 1000 feet. This suggests that
it will be quite feasible to prevent the transfer
of transgenes to non-transgenic varieties by following
recommended planting distances, just as is currently
done to maintain purity with conventional varieties.
See also Barton
and Dracup 2000.
Will
herbicide-resistant transgenic crops create "superweeds"?
This is a real threat where transgenic crops containing
a herbicide-resistance gene grow alongside closely
related weed species, such as wild mustards in canola
or jointed goatgrass in wheat. Gene movement from
crop to weed through pollen transfer has been demonstrated
for both of these crops. Proposals to reduce the
risk of creating transgenic "superweeds" include
linking herbicide-resistance genes to other genes
which are harmless to the crop but damaging to a
weed, such as genes which affect seed dormancy or
prevent flowering in the next generation. Thus if
a weed did acquire a herbicide-resistance gene from
a transgenic crop, its offspring would not survive
to spread the herbicide resistance through the weed
population.
Do
transgenic crops reduce biodiversity? It has
been argued that transgenic crops will replace traditional
crop varieties, especially in developing countries,
causing loss of biological diversity. This risk
is real, but not restricted to transgenic crops.
Farmers around the world have adopted new commercial
varieties in the past and they will continue to
do so as long as it is to their advantage. What
is needed is better conservation of traditional
crop varieties in danger of being lost, so that
the useful genes they contain can be preserved.
Will
insect pests become resistant to Bt toxins? A
major concern is that the widespread planting of
transgenic crops containing the insecticidal Bt
gene will expose many more insect pests to the Bt
toxin, accelerating the development of Bt resistance
in pest populations. We already know this can happen:
Bt resistance has been widely documented in the
diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella), a major
pest of vegetable crops, in the US and in some Asian
countries. This resulted from many years of growers
using Bt as an environmentally-friendly insecticidal
spray. Decreased susceptibility to Bt has recently
been documented in soybean loopers collected from
Bt cotton, indicating that resistance can arise
from exposure to transgenic crops (see Mascarenhas
et al. 1998). Strategies such as the use of non-transgenic
"refuge"areas have been proposed to prevent or slow
the development of Bt resistance in pest populations
- for more information on this topic go to the Current
Transgenic Products section of this website
and click on Insect Resistance to Bt Toxins at the
top of the page. See also Barton
and Dracup 2000.
Will
the widespread adoption of transgenic crops lead
to increased corporate control of the world's food
supply? Research and development leading to
the production of transgenic crop varieties is expensive
and requires resources unavailable to many developing
countries. Critics of the technology point out that
ownership and control of the transgenic crops currently
grown is in the hands of a small number of powerful
corporations, which often impose restrictive conditions
on farmers buying their seed. This trend has been
accelerated by the widespread patenting of plant
genes and germplasm in the US and some other countries.
For more detailed discussion of some of these issues,
see AgBioForum Vol.1 No.2 (Fall 1998), available
at http://www.agbioforum.org/
under Archives Jordan
2000.
|