Are Genetically Engineered Foods Safe?
The term GM foods or GMOs (genetically-modified organisms) is most commonly used to refer to crop plants created for human or animal consumption using the latest molecular biology techniques. Genetic engineering enables scientists to create plants, animals and micro-organisms by manipulating genes in a way that does not occur naturally. Genetic engineering (GE) is used to take genes and segments of DNA from one species and put them into another species. GE provides a set of techniques to cut DNA either randomly or at a number of specific sites. Once isolated one can study the different segments of DNA, multiply them up and splice them (stick them) next to any other DNA of another cell or organism. GE makes it possible to break through the species barrier and to shuffle information between completely unrelated species. Many foods that hit the dinner table today are genetically modified or engineered. According to the FDA these foods are thought to be safe for human consumption. Many people have found this to be a premature approval since not enough long term studies have been done to assure the public’s safety. The main concern seems to be whether food should be labeled stating that the food has been modified or genetically engineered. Lets see how other people feel about this situation.
This is the opinion of Art Caplan from an interview with Forbes.com. The big question remains: Do you have a right to know if your food comes from a genetically engineered animal? “I do think you have a right to know what you are eating or how the pet you are thinking of buying was created. The bioagriculture and food industry should simply agree to label — if not on packages then at least on publicly accessible Web sites.” http://blogs.forbes.com/sciencebizblog/2008/09/art-caplan-on-g.html
There are many responses to this issue from many areas of expertise. Here Dr SCHAUMBURG, of The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) applauded the release of federal guidance on the use of genetically engineered animals in research and food production. “Genetic engineering has opened many doors and has the potential to provide great benefit to humans, animals and our society," said W. Ron DeHaven, DVM, chief executive officer of the AVMA. Dr. DeHaven's comments were issued in response to today's announcement by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that it has released draft guidance on the regulation of genetically engineered animals and is asking for comments from the public. http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/avma-supports-fda-efforts-clarify/story.aspx?guid=%7B0798A1A2-4653-4B32-A9E3-11EC6A469B29%7D&dist=hppr
In turn many others feel that this is a problem as the gentleman that wrote this essay on Genetic Engineering. A fish gene will not work in a tomato unless it is given a promoter with a "flag" the tomato cells will recognize. Such a control sequence should either be a tomato sequence or something similar. Most companies and scientists do a shortcut here and don't even bother to look for an appropriate tomato promoter as it would take years to understand how the cell's internal communication and regulation works. In order to avoid long testing and adjusting, most genetic engineering of plants is done with viral promoters. Viruses - as you will be aware - are very active. Nothing, or almost nothing, will stop them once they have found a new victim or rather host. They integrate their genetic information into the DNA of a host cell (such as one of your own), multiply, infect the next cells and multiply. This is possible because viruses have evolved very powerful promoters which command the host cell to constantly read the viral genes and produce viral proteins. Simply by taking a control element (promoter) from a plant virus and sticking it in front of the information block of the fish gene, you can get this combined virus/fish gene (known as a "construct') to work wherever and whenever you want in a plant. This might sound great, the drawback though is that it can't be stopped either, it can't be switched off. The plant no longer has a say in the expression of the new gene, even when the constant involuntary production of the "new" product is weakening the plant's defences or growth. http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/GEessays/WhatisGE.html
The opinion of The Green Peace organization is as follows word for word from their website. Biological diversity must be protected and respected as the global heritage of humankind, and one of our world's fundamental keys to survival. Governments are attempting to address the threat of GE with international regulations such as the Biosafety Protocol. Their release is 'genetic pollution' and is a major threat because GMOs cannot be recalled once released into the environment. We believe: GMOs should not be released into the environment as there is not adequate scientific understanding of their impact on the environment and human health. We advocate immediate interim measures such as labeling of GE ingredients, and the segregation of genetically engineered crops and seeds from conventional ones. We also oppose all patents on plants, animals and humans, as well as patents on their genes. Life is not an industrial commodity. When we force life forms and our world's food supply to conform to human economic models rather than their natural ones, we do so at our own peril. http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/genetic-engineering
It seems that the people that are for engineering foods might have some type of profit to make from the food that is being reproduced. There are good things that can happen with engineering foods, such as supplementing vitamin A into rice so that the Chinese children are getting adequate amounts as to retain better vision and not suffer later in life. The fact is, is that not enough long term (long term being the key) studies have been conducted so we don’t know the effects of manipulating our food supply. I would hope that in the near future all food products would be labeled if they have been engineered, altered, or manipulated, just like organics or trans fat labels.
The term GM foods or GMOs (genetically-modified organisms) is most commonly used to refer to crop plants created for human or animal consumption using the latest molecular biology techniques. Genetic engineering enables scientists to create plants, animals and micro-organisms by manipulating genes in a way that does not occur naturally. Genetic engineering (GE) is used to take genes and segments of DNA from one species and put them into another species. GE provides a set of techniques to cut DNA either randomly or at a number of specific sites. Once isolated one can study the different segments of DNA, multiply them up and splice them (stick them) next to any other DNA of another cell or organism. GE makes it possible to break through the species barrier and to shuffle information between completely unrelated species. Many foods that hit the dinner table today are genetically modified or engineered. According to the FDA these foods are thought to be safe for human consumption. Many people have found this to be a premature approval since not enough long term studies have been done to assure the public’s safety. The main concern seems to be whether food should be labeled stating that the food has been modified or genetically engineered. Lets see how other people feel about this situation.
This is the opinion of Art Caplan from an interview with Forbes.com. The big question remains: Do you have a right to know if your food comes from a genetically engineered animal? “I do think you have a right to know what you are eating or how the pet you are thinking of buying was created. The bioagriculture and food industry should simply agree to label — if not on packages then at least on publicly accessible Web sites.” http://blogs.forbes.com/sciencebizblog/2008/09/art-caplan-on-g.html
There are many responses to this issue from many areas of expertise. Here Dr SCHAUMBURG, of The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) applauded the release of federal guidance on the use of genetically engineered animals in research and food production. “Genetic engineering has opened many doors and has the potential to provide great benefit to humans, animals and our society," said W. Ron DeHaven, DVM, chief executive officer of the AVMA. Dr. DeHaven's comments were issued in response to today's announcement by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that it has released draft guidance on the regulation of genetically engineered animals and is asking for comments from the public. http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/avma-supports-fda-efforts-clarify/story.aspx?guid=%7B0798A1A2-4653-4B32-A9E3-11EC6A469B29%7D&dist=hppr
In turn many others feel that this is a problem as the gentleman that wrote this essay on Genetic Engineering. A fish gene will not work in a tomato unless it is given a promoter with a "flag" the tomato cells will recognize. Such a control sequence should either be a tomato sequence or something similar. Most companies and scientists do a shortcut here and don't even bother to look for an appropriate tomato promoter as it would take years to understand how the cell's internal communication and regulation works. In order to avoid long testing and adjusting, most genetic engineering of plants is done with viral promoters. Viruses - as you will be aware - are very active. Nothing, or almost nothing, will stop them once they have found a new victim or rather host. They integrate their genetic information into the DNA of a host cell (such as one of your own), multiply, infect the next cells and multiply. This is possible because viruses have evolved very powerful promoters which command the host cell to constantly read the viral genes and produce viral proteins. Simply by taking a control element (promoter) from a plant virus and sticking it in front of the information block of the fish gene, you can get this combined virus/fish gene (known as a "construct') to work wherever and whenever you want in a plant. This might sound great, the drawback though is that it can't be stopped either, it can't be switched off. The plant no longer has a say in the expression of the new gene, even when the constant involuntary production of the "new" product is weakening the plant's defences or growth. http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/GEessays/WhatisGE.html
The opinion of The Green Peace organization is as follows word for word from their website. Biological diversity must be protected and respected as the global heritage of humankind, and one of our world's fundamental keys to survival. Governments are attempting to address the threat of GE with international regulations such as the Biosafety Protocol. Their release is 'genetic pollution' and is a major threat because GMOs cannot be recalled once released into the environment. We believe: GMOs should not be released into the environment as there is not adequate scientific understanding of their impact on the environment and human health. We advocate immediate interim measures such as labeling of GE ingredients, and the segregation of genetically engineered crops and seeds from conventional ones. We also oppose all patents on plants, animals and humans, as well as patents on their genes. Life is not an industrial commodity. When we force life forms and our world's food supply to conform to human economic models rather than their natural ones, we do so at our own peril. http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/genetic-engineering
It seems that the people that are for engineering foods might have some type of profit to make from the food that is being reproduced. There are good things that can happen with engineering foods, such as supplementing vitamin A into rice so that the Chinese children are getting adequate amounts as to retain better vision and not suffer later in life. The fact is, is that not enough long term (long term being the key) studies have been conducted so we don’t know the effects of manipulating our food supply. I would hope that in the near future all food products would be labeled if they have been engineered, altered, or manipulated, just like organics or trans fat labels.
0 comments:
Post a Comment