 |
Agricultural Biotechnology - securing a safe, abundant, high quality food
supply for Japan
|
Written by Dr. Fred Genthner, Microbiologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
The biotechnology revolution began in 1980, when a U.S. Supreme Court decision held that a live, man-made microorganism was patentable. Changed were the lives of virtually everyone on the earth as this decision provided the needed economic incentive for growth of an industry devoted to the creation of bioengineered plants and food products.
Although regulatory procedures were in place for safety evaluations and registrations of chemicals, genetically engineered organisms (biotech) presented novel challenges for risk assessments. In response to public concern and pressure placed upon government regulators to properly evaluate safety of biotechnology products, I was hired in 1985 by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to develop test methods to assess risk posed by the release of genetically engineered microorganisms. Thus, I became part of a huge effort by thousands of government and academic scientists in the United States, Canada, European Union and other countries investigating safety of biotechnology products on human health and the environment. Thousands of peer-reviewed research reports covering such topics as survival, gene transfer, effects on non-target organisms, displacement of indigenous species and effects on human health and environmental processes have appeared in major scientific journals providing a comprehensive data bases with which to make informed decisions regarding use of biotechnology products. With this as introduction, the purpose of this article is to argue that use of biotech products cleared through both the United States’ and Japan’s strict regulatory approval processes offers its citizens long-term security for a safe, wholesome and abundant food supply.
We live in an uncertain world. Food availability, quality and cost are threatened by adverse weather conditions such as drought, floods, typhoons or as some scientist have hypothesized, rapid climatic change (global warming). Devastating diseases of both plants (eg., rice blast, asiatic soybean rust and corn borer) and animals (bird flu and BSE) also present a threat to Japan’s food security. Environmental stress on crops and livestock plus globalization will all but insure increases in existing and emerging disease outbreaks threatening the availability and quality of agricultural goods. In addition to natural causes, human activities including war, agricultural terrorism, pollution, political instability and loss of farmland due to expanding populations will continue alter food availability and quality. As Japan imports much of its needed food supply (approximately 60% on a caloric basis), issues of food security are, and should be, of great public concern.
Advances in biotechnology offer security and insurance protection for most potential threats to food security. A primary way in which protection is provided is through speed of response to a threat. Tradition selective breeding for desirable traits, a slow and inefficient process, can now be accomplished rapidly, precisely and efficiently though genetic engineering. Among the many food security issues effectively addressed through genetic engineering techniques are disease resistance, drought tolerance, increased productivity for an expanding global population, enhanced nutritional value, bioremediation/biotransformation of toxins which may contaminate food supplies, reductions in the use of hazardous chemical pesticides and herbicides and post-harvest stability. To date, there is no evidence that these products are significantly different in terms of food safety from crops produced through traditional breeding techniques.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Food and Drug Administration, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture share the majority of responsibility for food safety in the United States. Thus, any biotech product imported by Japan has already undergone rigorous comprehensive safety testing and evaluations by U.S. scientists.
In the United States, all safety issues must be addressed by the manufacturer of a new biotech product before it can be approved. It is estimated that over 70 percent of the food in grocery stores in the United States contains biotech ingredients. This indicates a high level of acceptance by U.S. consumers, despite ongoing scrutiny and involvement by consumer interest groups. Rest assured, there are no separate safety standards for biotech products that the U.S. exports to Japan and products consumed by the American public.
As an additional measure of consumer protection, Japan also has an effective biotech regulatory system that has approved 190 biotech products for food, feed and planting. However, some aspects of the Japanese system (such as scientifically unjustified food and feed review procedures and a no-tolerance limit for trace amounts of unapproved biotech crops being mixed with approved crops) inhibit trade and therefore investment and scientific advancement. Japan is a huge force in world agricultural markets and in a very real sense decides what biotech crops get planted and which ones do not.
Many charges and fears surrounding the use of biotech agricultural products are either unfounded or exaggerated. In truth, biotech foods pose the same types of human health risks as conventional foods. Allergens, toxins and compounds known to inhibit absorption of nutrients, frequently raised as concerns for biotech products, are commonly found in most foods. For example, many people are allergic to peanuts, soy and wheat; lima beans naturally contain cyanide compounds and most seeds and cereals contain phytate, a compound that forms a complex with many important minerals, reducing the food’s nutritional quality. In addition, genes in the foods you eat are not adsorbed or expressed; they are completely digested like any other nutrient. After all, when you eat
pork or seafood you do not acquire traits from pig or fish. It is important to note that before marketing biotech food, developers evaluate risks even though they are not routinely evaluated in conventional foods. The take home lesson is that tests conducted by developers of biotech agricultural products address all of these potential concerns. If any undesirable property is uncovered, changes are made at the developmental stage; marketing is delayed until the problem is fully resolved.
I hope I have provided a convincing argument in support of the fact that scientists developing these products are working on your behalf - not at your peril. A goal of the United States is to increase food security through trade. However, farmers and scientists require your confidence and support to continue providing safe, high quality and nutritious, agricultural products in an uncertain world.
---------------------------------------
Dr. Fred Genthner is a microbiologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. He was serving as an Embassy Science Fellow at the U.S. Embassy
in Tokyo.
|
|
|
|
