|
Menu Options: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Preferred Service Providers |
| |
|
Cleaning Chemicals |
| |
 |
| |
|
Pest Prevention Services |
| |
 |
| |
Outsourced
Cleaning Services |
| |
 |
| |
|
Certification Body |
| |
 |
|
Article: Are foodstuffs derived from genetically
modified organisms safe?
Is present legislation adequate to ensure safety? These
are legitimate concerns in the minds of many consumers.
The Directorate: Food Control of the Department of
Health, as member of the Executive Council for
Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in terms of the
GMO Act, 1997 (Act No. 15 of 1997) has a specific
responsibility to ensure food safety. The Directorate
feels confident that foodstuffs developed from
genetically modified crops (GM-foods) approved in South
Africa (maize, cotton, soybeans) are as safe as their
conventional counterparts.
To give perspective on GM-food safety a number of
questions are answered, taking into account:
• The guidance from international bodies such as the
Food and Agricultural Organization
(FAO) and the World
Health Organization (WHO);
• The existence of government strategies, legislation
and structures that oversee food
safety issues;
• Existence of scientific data; and
• Issues that are often expressed in the media as
consumer concerns.
What is the role of international bodies in assuring the
safety of GM foods?
FAO and WHO play a significant role, especially by means
of Codex Alimentarius Commission. Codex gives guidance
on food safety issues based on science. In 2003 it
approved the principles and a number of guidelines for
the conduct of safety assessments of these foods. Many
countries, including South Africa, are implementing the
guidelines.
What is the role of the South African government in the
approval of these GM foods?
To receive approval for testing, production and trading
in GM crops an applicant has to submit information as
specified by government. Various procedures for dealing
with genetically modified organisms are stipulated in
the Genetically Modified Organisms Act, 1997 (Act No 15
of 1997). The Act is based on the most recent and
internationally accepted approach for dealing with
risks. This approach is to separate the risk assessment
(mainly the scientific technical part) from the decision
making part which includes also the management of risks.
Six relevant government departments are represented on
the Council, each within their specific mandates. The
Advisory Committee consists of a number of scientists
who are experts in their respective fields. A group of
reviewers are also appointed to assist the advisors.
Experts not on the Committee could be consulted,
including internationally acknowledged experts.
What are GM foods?
GM food is the popular terminology used for foods
derived through modern biotechnology as defined by the
FAO and WHO. But these foods are not modified, they are
obtained from modified organisms e.g. from grain crops.
The techniques that are used to develop these organisms
emerged about 25 years ago and are therefore relatively
new. The development of GM-foods is based on the
knowledge and experience, for example, with fermentation
techniques (cheese making, beer making), tissue culture,
plant selection and plant breeding. The products from
modern biotechnology include vaccines, hormones, enzymes
used in food processing, industrial applications
(detergents), waste processing, and crop plants.
What are the principles that govern safety assessment?
All assessments are done case-by-case and step-by step.
As with all new experiences comparisons with known foods
are constantly made. This approach, which is the
starting point of risk assessment of genetically
modified food, is often called “substantial
equivalency”.
What are the most important matters that are dealt with
in risk assessment?
The “modern” part of this technology is the transfer of
the new gene from a donor to the recipient organism and
characterization of the genetic modification. It is
important that the new gene(s) is stably inserted in the
genome of the host plant. This is confirmed with modern
biotechnology techniques in the laboratory but also with
conventional practices. This requires laboratory
experimentation and familiarity with plant breeding
practices.
Field trials also present the opportunity to scrutinize
for unwanted or unexpected effects by having a closer
look at the components – carbohydrates, protein, amino
acids, fatty acids, vitamins, minerals, and natural
toxins. These trials are statistically designed to
include a range of environmental influences. The results
are compared statistically with historical data as well
as with globally available data. Special attention is
given to plants that contain allergens.
Proteins (or enzymes) are the products of gene
expression. The presence of the proteins is followed
throughout the whole plant. It is important to know how
much of the new protein(s) is present in the edible
parts. The new protein is extensively researched through
toxicological assays according to international
standards. A thorough assessment is also conducted to
determine possible allergenicity of the “new” protein.
An example of proteins that are natural pesticides that
have been assessed, are those from the bacterium
Bacillus thuringiensis. Another example is the proteins
from genes involved in the metabolism of herbicides
resulting in tolerance to these chemicals.
These tests are exhaustive. Never before were so many
tests conducted to ensure food safety.
How is exposure assessed?
The major food products such as maize meal, are
individually assessed. The amount of exposure is
determined by taking into consideration the
concentration of the new protein in the edible parts of
the plant and the amount consumed per day by the people.
Are the long-term effects assessed?
The approach is to compare with the known conventional
counterpart and then to focus on differences such as the
new protein. After having considered all these, the
conclusion for those foods that are presently on the
market, is that these foods are as safe as their
conventional counterparts. This means that the long-term
effect would be as for the conventional counterpart.
What is the risk of antibiotic resistance?
In order to select for and trace the novel gene, a
marker gene is inserted. Antibiotic resistance marker
genes have often been used. These could be present or
removed during the development. The concern is that the
resistance could be transferred to the human gut
organisms. The chance of such a gene to overcome all the
barriers from food processing, digestion, competition
with other genes, compatibility and entering the gut
bacteria genome, is theoretically infinitesimally small.
Nevertheless, genes for resistance to clinically used
antibiotics, is to be phased out.
What is the conclusion: are these foods safe?
GM-foods that are on the market approved by government
are as safe as their conventional counter parts. This is
also the conclusion by other countries that had approved
these foods. The European Parliament came to the
conclusion after 15 years of research, spending about 65
million dollars on more than 80 projects, that the foods
currently on the market are safe as the conventional
counterparts and perhaps even safer.
Consumers should realize that the risk assessment phase
is also the phase of research and development before the
food is released for sale. Consumer concerns about food
safety are addressed during this assessment phase.
Consumers benefit directly and indirectly from modern
biotechnology. The insect resistant GM plants are less
infected by pests and therefore require less pesticide
application and may have less secondary fungal infection
that causes mycotoxin contamination. The herbicide
tolerant plants need less herbicides with persistence in
the soil to control weeds and therefore less herbicide
residues. In future foods with more direct benefits to
the consumer such as improved vitamin content could be
expected. |
|
|
