Biotechnology is the use of living organisms to make products.
Genetic engineering is one of the main forms of biotechnology used
for the past decade. Through genetic engineering, copies of genes
(selected for desirable traits) are transferred between different
organisms. DNA is nature's blueprint that creates the uniqueness of a
living organism. Genetic engineering manipulates an organism at the
very source of its uniqueness, its DNA, and fundamentally changes
it.
Genetically engineered food is created by taking DNA from one living organism and transplanting it into another. The process can be used to transfer genetic characteristics to both plants and animals. The resulting organisms are called "transgenic species" or "living modified organisms." This modified gene material cannot result from traditional selective breeding.
Genetic engineering allows genes to be shared among completely unrelated species. Genes from a flounder, for instance, are put into a tomato to give the tomato some desirable characteristic that only the flounder used to have. In this case, the gene allows tomatoes to withstand cold and frost better.
It became more prevalent in 1995-1996 when U.S. regulators (FDA and EPA) approved the commercialisation of several new genetically engineered crop species. These are now being dispersed by farmers on a large scale.
There are two ways: First, the crops are genetically engineered to withstand herbicide applications. This way, herbicides can be applied to plants to kill just the weeds. Second, crops are genetically engineered so that the plant itself is toxic to particular pests.
Bt, Bacillus turingiensis--This natural bacteria exists in the soil. Caterpillars that eat it die. Bt has been cultivated and manufactured into a product that is sprayed on crops and is used by almost all organic farmers. Now, Monsanto has put Bt genes into cotton, potatoes and tomatoes. The resulting plants become poisonous to certain pests.
It has a huge impact and organic farmers are very concerned about the far reaching implications. They are concerned that as a result of the Bt genes being added to plants, insect pests of many kinds will eventually develop resistance to Bt and therefore be rendered ineffective as a pesticide. Organic farmers will then lose their best natural pest-contol agent.
Many opponents say that pesticide use will actually increase. Because GE cash-crop plants can withstand herbicides, farmers are apt to apply them more freely to rid their field of weeds. In recent years, farmers have increased chemical agents to maintain yields.
Again, opponents say the products are too new and haven't been adequately tested. Some question whether a plant such as a tomato that has a 12-week shelf life is more nutritious than a fresher variety. What genetically altered products are now on the market? Monsanto and Novartis produce genetically altered soybeans, tomatoes, squash, oil seed rape, cotton and corn. Of these, however, genetically engineered soy beans have infiltrated the food supply to the greatest degree. Thirteen percent to 16 percent of the country's soybean crop is grown from genetically engineered seeds. Between 60 percent and 70 percent of processed foods contain soya. Without testing, it is impossible to know how much of that is genetically engineered. Further, in the past year, the amount of genetically engineered corn on the market has increased from 0.6 percent to 6 percent.
Transgenic food is not rigorously regulated because the FDA says such foods are safe. Companies must get FDA approval to market a genetically engineered product only if the food contains a known toxic substance, contains nutrients that differ from the original food, or contains any new substances or a known food allergen. Current FDA policy counts on individual companies to determine the thoroughness of their premarket safety testing. If the companies do not perceive that there is any danger to the consumer, they are not required to state that their products have been genetically altered or to indicate the source of the implanted genes. Also, companies are not required to publish the results of safety tests.
The government does not require labelling of foods containing genetically engineered ingredients. There is a growing voice demanding that such foods be labelled.
Consumer awareness of biotechnology is rising because of media attention about the cloning of a sheep. Two recent surveys reveal that the majority of U.S. respondents perceive genetically engineered foods to be relatively safe. A survey by the International Food Information Council, sponsored by companies including Monsanto and DuPont, indicated that 77 percent of respondents would be somewhat likely or very likely to purchase genetically engineered foods to reduce reliance on pesticides and herbicides. Ninety-three percent of respondents supported mandatory labelling. However, by a 25 percent-to-54 percent margin, respondents to a survey by Novartis said they preferred organic farming methods rather than Bo-engineering to produce an adequate food supply in the future.
Genetic engineering opponents say that the long-term effects on both consumers and the environment are not known; the immediate concern is that the newly developed genes can carry toxins and allergens that can be harmful. In one case first reported in the New England Journal of Medicine, a genetically engineered batch of the food supplement tryptophan carried a toxin that killed 37 people and permanently disabled l,500 more. With almost 5 million Americans suffering from food allergies, the risk of unknown allergens in foods is high. And without labelling, those who would be affected won't know what is in the food they are consuming. Other possible side effects include increased resistance to antibiotics, contamination of soil and runoff water, and uncontrollable cross-pollination leading to unpredictable results.
Right now, "certified organic" means that the farming methods used were verified by one of the approximately 40 private or state certification programs nation-wide. Genetically engineered foods cannot be currently labelled as "organic." The USDA's proposed federal regulations may allow judging of individual genetically engineered products on a case-by-case basis. Current members of the National Organic Standards Board indicated that they will be extremely strict in case-by-case decisions regarding synthetic chemical inputs. There is concern among the organic community that the proposed USDA regulations will make it illegal for them to uphold stricter standards than the USDA allows. There is a large and growing coalition of people in the organic industry that believes genetically engineered ingredients do not have a place in organic foods. This coalition plans a massive and co-ordinated response to the USDA's proposed rules should they allow them, even on a case-by-case basis.
There is far more opposition in Europe, perhaps because of the experience with mad cow disease. As of July 1997, no unlabeled genetically engineered foods can be imported into any European Union country. Further, thousands of consumers have participated in referendums, signed petitions and protested at the corporate headquarters of biotechnology companies. Genetically engineered foods are banned in Austria and Luxembourg.
Mothers for Natural Law, based in Fairfield, Iowa, recently launched an ongoing petition to support labelling of genetically altered foods. Retailers are encouraged to place the petitions in their stores. In addition, groups including Greenpeace, the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Sustainable Food Center work to educate consumers. If you could not find an answer to your question in the information above, please e-mail us the question and we'll respond promptly.