The dreaded "GMO"

"Gee. emM. Ooh!!" Most people have heard the acronym, and most people don't like it. This becomes obvious if you even mention it aloud, and notice the snarled faces of those who heard you. However, I have also noticed that many don't actually understand what a GMO is, what it isn't, and why these engineered organisms get so much press.

GMOs are Genetically Modified Organisms- that is, an organism that has it's genes modified. These types of organisms are very common and scientist use them in their research all the time; we use them to develop new drugs, make new antibodies, test protein functions, and much, much more. In the science laboratory, GMOs are incredibly useful and the research they are used for can help cure diseases and save lives. But I don't think most people are all that concerned about the GMOs in labs, rather I think most people care when these modification are made in crop plants that are grown for human consumption.

  The most famous examples of GMO crops are:

• Golden rice, which contains a gene to make Vitamin A.
• Bt-Corn, a strain of corn that is resistant to a very common pest the corn borer.
• Round-up Ready crops that are herbicide resistant

But how are these crops made? How is rice modified to make vitamins and corn made to kill catepillars? Well, as you will recall from my earlier post about genes, genes are small pieces of DNA that are used by cells to make proteins. Based on this knowledge, scientists realized that if they put a new piece of DNA (i.e. a new gene) in a cell than that cell will make a new protein. It is really quite simple and elegant. In the case of Golden Rice, they first had to find out how Vitamin A is made naturally. They did this by looking at plants that are a natural source of Vitamin A, such as carrots. Carrots make a protein called 'beta-carotene'. This protein is what gives carrots their orange colour and their nutritional value. When we eat carrots we eat the beta-carotene which is then processed into Vitamin A in our livers (this is done by cutting the protein in half and creating two Vitamin A molecules). Once scientists learned how beta-carotene is made by carrots, all they had to do was insert the genes for beta-carotene synthesis into a seed of a rice, and tell the rice to turn the genes 'on' in the part of the plant we eat (this is important, because if the beta-carotene is not made in the part of the plant we eat (i.e. the rice, not the leaves) than we would not get the Vitamin A from this GMO). The genes (there are 2 of them) become part of the rice plant's genome, and this genetically modified plant can now make beta-carotene. Presto! This new rice plant is not only orange like carrots (hence the "Golden" name), but it is also nutritional like carrots. Scientifically speaking, "this is pretty damn cool, eh"!?

Now that we understand how GMOs can be made, lets consider why they get so much press. Well, the press centers around the huge and on-going debate about whether GMOs are the next best thing since sliced bread, or the worst application of science ever imagined. Those against GMOs are most often concerned about two major issues: potential risks to biodiversity and to human health. Risks to biodiversity include concerns about the unnatural exchange of genetic information and the shuffling of genes from one organism into another. Many people are worried that the pollen from a GMO plant will spread into wild species and change crop plants forever. Another major concern for biodiversity is that we will harm animals and insects that eat or come into contact with the GMO crops. For instance, are butterflies that pollinate corn plants being harmed by the genes in Bt-Corn? What about the humans that eat this corn? Will they be harmed from the genes? Many of the crops have not been properly tested for long-term impacts on health. These are all very relevant concerns that do not have clear answers yet.



This movie gives a very nice description of how genes are actually inserted into the cells of GMOs. It also discusses the public concern around these crops and highlights the need for increased research around the potential side-effects of mass producing GMOs. The video showcases the con-side of the debate.

On the other side of the debate, are the pro-GMO. These people would say creating GMOs is similar to a natural processes that occurs during evolution. If the genes of plants become modified anyways over time, what is so wrong with humans speeding it up? They also say that creating GMOs is not new, and that humans have practiced this technique since the advent of agriculture by selecting plants that make larger tomotoes or more cobs of corn. This type of selection has genetically changed most of the foods we eat and is why wild plants look and taste very different from the food we buy in our grocery stores. These same proponents will state the potential environmental and nutritional benefits of GMOs. For instance, by putting herbicide and pesticide genes into plants we no longer need to spray copious amounts of chemicals all over the crop. And the nutritional benefits of GMOs can also help reduce malnutrition in the poorest of nations.

Lets return to the Golden Rice story and address the question: "why even bother make rice golden?" If we can get Vitamin A from carrots why would we even put it into rice? Well, this is because rice is actually the number one food source for most of the world's population. Virtually everyone eats rice, and for the poorest people, rice may be all they eat. It is relatively cheap, it stores well and it is high in calories- so a little goes a long way. This explains why the creators of Golden Rice decided to use rice. They decided to put beta-carotene in it in order to help eradicate Vitamin A deficiencies.  It turns out that while we Canadians enjoy carrots with virtually every meal, over 250 million children in other nations are suffering from a lack of carrots! Vitamin A deficiencies are very common in the poorest countries of the world, and Golden Rice can potentially help relieve this problem.

Based on the potential benefits of GMOs, it is my opinion that in theory GMOs have great promise and can actually be very helpful to humans and the environment. We can increase the nutritional value of food and reduce the use of dangerous chemicals. However, in practice these crops are made by companies. These companies include the massive multinational corporation Monsanto. And, like all companies, GMO companies have one priority: to make money. So there are strict patents that are placed on these crops that make the seeds very expensive to buy. And worse, most GMOs are made to make the companies more money; they insert genes to extend the shelf-life of the plant instead of the nutritional value. This results in most GMOs not actually being helpful to humans at all! And so, although in theory GMOs can be great, in practice and in policy that greatness is not being realized.

Here is a very interesting note written by UBC graduate student Ana Chávez Steenbock.  She discusses the potential dangers of GMOs and the political issues surrounding this controversial technology.

A team lead by Ph.D. Ignacio Chapela found genetically modified corn (maize) growing in the states of Oaxaca, Mexico. Environmentalists claim that the arrival of trangenic strains there could disrupt the genome of naturally bred corn. However, his scientific paper published in 2001 was discredited since such news was not benefiting the biotech industry. It was the first paper ever retracted by the prestigious journal Nature.  [Nature 414, 541-543 (29 November 2001) doi:10.1038/35107068]

What a shame that scientist doing honest research that conflicts with the interest of the biotech industry have to fight to show their results are valid. This publication got the UC Berkeley professor Chapela to have his tenure denied due to pressure from the biotech company Monsanto on the University.

Chapela filed a lawsuit against the Regents of the University of California, saying that there were corporate conflicts of interest in the tenure decision process. In April 2005 UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau granted tenure.

Chapela has emerged as perhaps the leading academic critic of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and a champion of opponents of the increasing corporate control over the world’s food supply."

"Difficult to Do Science Not Promotional of the Biotech Industry"

Video | Ignacio Chapela | Link TV

www.linktv.org

         By Ana Chávez Steenbock.

***************

Other Related articles

• Questions about GMOs (greenfacts.org)
• What are Genetically Modified Foods & Are They Good For You? (brighthub.com)
• GM food: We need more science, not less. (greenfudge.org)
• In the Fields of Italy, a Conflict Over Corn (nytimes.com)
• Organic Practices Beat Out Genetic Engineering in Drought Tolerance (food.change.org)
• GMO contaminates traditional corn (trinitybook.wordpress.com)
• Group produces GM rice (news.theage.com.au)
• Genetically Modified Beets Stir Belated Debate (green.blogs.nytimes.com)
• Monsanto's Planned Deceit (whsword.wordpress.com