THINK OF THESE: When foods are altered by science

Rice comes in different colors: white, brown, red and black. Coming soon: a yellow one called golden rice. Actually, it is a genetically engineered rice variety that has been developed by the biotech industry to produce pro-vitamin A (beta-carotene).

The proponents offer golden rice as one of the possible ways of solving the vitamin A deficiency (VAD), which is prevalent in developing countries, including the Philippines. Oftentimes, VAD can lead to blindness

But still there are those who oppose for the commercialization of golden rice. The Greenpeace International said: “It is irresponsible to impose golden rice on people if it is contrary to their religious beliefs, cultural heritage and sense of identity.”

Rice is just one of the crops altered by science through biotechnology. Crops which have been inserted with genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) that are now available in the market include soybean, corn, tomato, potato, papaya, squash, canola, and sugar beet.

“We need criticism to keep us awake,” Dr. Jose P. Rizal, the country’s national hero, once said. Aside from those mentioned earlier, activists also opposed GM crops because of health reasons like allergens and antibiotic resistance.

Their reasons are valid. But then, foods derived from GM crops have undergone more testing than any other food in history. Before entering the marketplace, they are assessed consistent with guidelines issued by several international scientific agencies like the World Health Organization (WHO), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

The guidelines imposed on biotech crops are as follows:

  • GM food products should be regulated in the same way as foods produced by other methods. The risks associated with foods derived from biotechnology are of the same nature as those for conventional foods.
  • These products will be judged on their individual safety, allergenicity, toxicity, and nutrition rather than the methods or techniques to produce them.
  • Any new ingredient added to food through biotechnology will be subjected to pre-market approval in the same way a new food additive, such as a preservative or food color, must be approved before it reaches the marketplace.

There are several questions asked when GM crops are introduced into the marketplace: Does the GM food have a traditional counterpart that has a history of safe use? Has the concentration of any naturally occurring toxins or allergens in the food changed? Have the levels of key nutrients changed?

That’s not all. Other questions include: Do new substances in the GM food have a history of safe use? Has the food’s digestibility been affected? Has the food been produced using accepted, established procedures?

“Even after these and other questions about the GM food are answered, there are still more steps in the approval process before the GM food can be commercialized,” said a fact sheet produced by the Laguna-based International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Application (ISAAA).

In 1994, the first genetically modified (GM) food, a tomato with a delayed ripening trait, was grown and consumed in a developed country. The biotech tomato spend more days on the vine than other tomatoes, thus resulting in better flavor. In addition, the longer shelf life has commercial advantages in harvesting and shipping that can reduce the costs of production.

Both the United States and China produce biotech tomato while Canada and Mexico are importing them.

Most of the Gm crops currently available in the market have an increased level of crop protection through the introduction of resistance against plant pests and diseases caused by insects, viruses, or other pathogens. Others have an increased tolerance towards herbicides.

“GM crops are developed using the tools of modern biotechnology and it is because of this that many have questioned whether these foods are safe as those that have been developed using more traditional agricultural methods,” the ISAAA said.

Actually, there is no difference between conventional plant breeding and plant biotechnology. “Their purpose is one and the same: to produce superior plant varieties with improved characteristics that make them better to grow or more desirable to eat. The difference lies in how this is achieved,” the ISAAA said.

According to ISAAA, the techniques used in modern plant biotechnology provide plant breeders with “precise tools that permit them to introduce desirable characteristics into a plant.”

A booklet produced by the Biotechnology Information Center of Southeast Asia Regional Center for Agriculture (SEARCA) explains: “It enables plant breeders to bring in one plant useful genes from a wide range of sources, not just within the crop species or closely-related plants.

“This powerful took allows plant breeders to attain a desired trait combination faster and address urgent concerns like the development of crops that are resistant to biotic (diseases and pests) or abiotic stresses (drought and waterlogging), and with increased yield and improved food and nutrient quality,” it added.

Now, regarding its food safety, the WHO assured: “The potential direct health effects of GM foods are generally comparable to the known risks associated with conventional foods, and include, for example, the potential for allergenicity and toxicity of components present, and the nutritional quality and microbiological safety of the food.”

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here