Ethics of GM Foods

Clark Ford, Ph.D.

Food Science and Human Nutrition

Iowa State University

Genetic Engineering

• Genetic Engineering involves manipulating DNA molecules

• DNA from one species is spliced into the DNA of another species– Called: Recombinant DNA

• Genetically Engineered organisms are called:– Genetically Modified

– Transgenic

Milestones in Genetic Engineering of Food

• 1953: Structure of DNA discovered

• 1973: First gene cloned

– in microbes

• 1977: Asilomar Conference in USA

– Recombinant DNA safety

– Regulation

– Risk assessment

– Containment

Milestones in Genetic Engineering of Food

• 1990: Recombinant Chymosin Approved by FDA– Enzyme for cheese making

– Originally from calf stomach

– Bovine gene expressed in GRAS microbes

– In 80% of U.S. cheese

– “Vegetarian” cheese in England

Other Products from Genetically Engineered Microbes

• Food enzymes– Bread– HFCS Sweeteners

• Amino acids• Peptides

– Nutrasweet

• Flavors• Organic acids• Polysaccharides• Vitamins

Milestones in Genetic Engineering of Food

• 1994: FDA approves

“Flavr Savr” Tomato– Prolonged shelf life

– Improved quality

– Voluntarily labeled

Other Genetically Engineered Plants

• Agronomic traits– BT Corn– Roundup Ready Soy– Disease Resistance

• Food quality • Nutrition• Metabolic products• Vaccines

Bt Corn

• Natural insecticide from Bacillus thuringiensis

• Non-toxic to humans• Target insect: corn borer• Potential to:

– reduce insecticide use– reduce mycotoxins

• 50% U.S. Corn crop Bt

Bt Concerns

• Bt pollen harms non-target species?• Bt crops select for resistant insects• Bt pollen can drift to organic fields• Food system failed to keep BT

Starlink corn out of human food products

Herbicide Resistance

• Roundup Ready Soy, Corn, Canola

• Allows post-emergence herbicide spraying

• Increases yield

• Facilitates no-till farming

• 80% U.S. Soy crop

Herbicide Resistance Concerns

• Encourages herbicide use– Groundwater contamination– Kills beneficial soil microbes

• Cross-pollinates weeds• Fosters dependence on

Agrochemcial companies

Disease Resistance• Canola

• Cantaloupes

• Cucumbers

• Corn

• Rice

• Papaya

• Potatoes

• Soybeans

• Squash

• Tomatoes

• Wheat

Genetically engineered papaya resistant papaya ringspot virus

Health and Nutrition

• Golden Rice– Vitamin A and Iron

enhanced

– Seeds given to the poor for free

• Improved Amino Acid Balance for Soy, Maize

• Banana Vaccines

Milestones in Genetic Engineering of Food

• 1999: GM corn and soybean products are present in 80% of processed foods– Corn:

• starch, high fructose corn syrup, oil

– Soy:

• oil, Lecithin, protein

Milestones in Genetic Engineering of Food

• 1999: European Union requires GM labels, blocks import of GM corn, beans– Ban lifted 2004 but no

change in anti-gm sentiment in Europe

Milestones in Genetic Engineering of Food

• 1999: Gerber and Heinz baby foods GM-free

• 2000: Mc Donalds and Frito-Lay products GM-free

Milestones in Genetic Engineering of Food

• 2000: USDA Organic Foods Standards– Must be GM-free

Controversy over GMO Foods

• Debate pits consumer and ecology groups against Multinational Corporations

• Many farmers, scientists, government agencies caught in the middle

Arguments for Genetically Engineered Food

• Potential to:– Increase productivity– Increase purity– Increase safety– Improve nutrition– Improve food quality– Improve sustainability– Benefit ecosystem

• Process not inherently harmful

• Similar to traditional Plant and Animal breeding

• Unless misused, outcome expected to be beneficial– Is a powerful technology

that could help humanity

• Bad ideas weeded out by the market, regulation, lawsuit

--Paul Thompson

Arguments against Genetically Engineered Foods

• Potential safety risk for humans– Unintended Consequences

• Genetic Engineering is playing God– Not Natural to move genes between species

• Potential safety risk for environment– Could spread

• Genetically Engineered label not required in U.S.• Benefits multinational corporations

– not consumers or developing nations

Frankenstein Foods: Unintended Consequences?

• Random gene insertion

• Toxicity – New gene products?– Allergies

• Eating DNA!

Arguments for Labeling

• Not Substantially equivalent to non-GM

• Must use Precautionary principle• Is uncertainty in risk assessment• Labeling indicates process used• Consumer’s right to know and choose• Country’s right to know and choose

Arguments against labeling

• Suggests non-existent hazard• Expensive to segregate crops

and change labels• FDA labels required if change

in:• Allergenicity• Nutrition• Food Quality

Will it Feed the World?

• Disease resistance will benefit developing nations

• Technology requiring increased inputs benefits wealthy, multinationals, plantations

• Small, subsistence farmers can’t compete, lose land

• Inequity, poverty increase• Thus more food and more hunger

• Green Revolution unsustainable