Lect

ure

5A

gric

ult

ura

lGM

app

licat

ion

s:

Tran

sgen

iccr

ops

and

GM

ingr

edie

nts

in f

ood

s

Pro

f. D

r. A

rtem

is K

araa

liD

epar

tmen

tof

Foo

dEn

gin

eeri

ng

Ista

nbu

lTec

hn

ical

Un

iver

sity

, Ist

anbu

l, Tu

rkey

kara

ali@

itu

.edu

.tr

Ove

rvie

wof

Pre

sen

tati

on

•G

ener

al in

trod

uct

ion

•H

isto

ry o

fG

M f

ood

s•

How

GM

foo

ds a

re m

ade

•M

ajor

deba

tes

and

con

cern

edst

akeh

old

ers

•Ev

alu

atio

ns

from

safe

tyan

det

hic

sas

pec

ts•

Con

clu

din

gR

emar

ks

Form

al D

efin

ition

:

•“G

enet

ical

ly m

odifi

ed f

ood”

: "

a fo

od w

hich

is,

or w

hich

is m

ade

from

, a g

enet

ical

ly m

odifi

ed

orga

nism

and

whi

ch c

onta

ins

gene

tic m

ater

ial

or p

rote

in r

esul

ting

from

thi

s m

odifi

catio

n".

From

: EU

Nov

el F

oods

Reg

ulat

ion

GM

Tec

hno

logy

•Ea

rlie

r G

M p

ract

ises

: “S

elec

tive

bree

ding

thro

ugh

hyb

ridi

sati

on”

Two

rela

ted

orga

nis

ms

(pla

nts

or

anim

als)

are

cros

s-fe

rtili

sed

and

the

resu

ltin

g of

fspr

ing

has

the

char

acte

rist

ics

of b

oth

par

ents

. B

reed

ers

then

sel

ect

and

repr

oduc

e th

e of

fspr

ing

that

has

the

mos

t de

sire

d tr

aits

.D

isad

van

tage

s: r

ando

m+

lon

g+te

diou

spr

oces

s, w

ith

spec

ies

barr

ier

•M

oder

n p

ract

ise

of “

gen

etic

en

gin

eeri

ng”:

“R

ec-D

NA

” D

irec

t in

terv

enti

on o

n t

he

gene

tic

mak

e-u

p of

an

or

gani

sm b

y in

trod

uci

ng

fore

ign

DN

A in

to it

s ge

ne

pool

by

mea

ns

that

wou

ld n

ot o

ccu

r na

tura

lly, e

nab

ling

h

um

ans

to c

reat

e ar

tifi

cial

org

anis

ms

that

are

no

lon

ger

the

resu

lt o

f th

e n

atu

ral m

ean

s of

the

ev

olu

tion

ary

deve

lopm

ent.

How

GM

tech

nolo

gyis

pra

ctis

ed: T

hest

ate

of th

ear

t

The

actu

alpr

oced

ure

of “

GM

” is

a f

airl

ylo

w-

tech

nol

ogy:

tod

ayit

is p

ossi

ble

tore

aliz

eit

eve

nin

so

me

hig

hsc

hoo

lsci

ence

labo

rato

ries

in t

he

USA

.

The

very

prec

iou

s“k

now

-how

”, h

owev

er, i

s n

ot in

h

owth

eac

tual

proc

edu

reis

app

lied,

bu

t in

th

em

oder

nco

mpu

ter

data

base

s co

nta

inin

g h

uge

amou

nts

of

sequ

ence

dat

afr

om t

he

gen

ome

proj

ects

wh

ich

mak

e th

e ta

sk o

f id

enti

fyin

g th

e ge

nes

wit

h

part

icu

lar

desi

red

char

acte

rist

ics

far

easi

er t

han

co

uld

eve

r be

imag

ined

in t

he

past

.

The

“dile

mm

a” h

ere

is:

this

data

is

not

rea

dily

avai

labl

eto

alln

atio

nsor

allf

irm

s, b

ut

sole

lyto

a fe

wm

ulti

nat

ion

alfi

rms

wh

oh

ave

hea

vily

inve

sted

in t

he

fiel

dof

bio

tech

nol

ogy.

His

toric

al B

ackg

roun

d•

19

70

’s:

Firs

tag

ricul

tura

lGM

app

licat

ions

in t

hela

bora

torie

s•

19

84

: In

trod

uctio

nof

firs

tge

nera

tion

(pro

duce

rs’

ben

efit

orie

nte

d) o

f fie

ld-s

cale

GM

pro

duct

s: t

rans

geni

cpl

ant

crop

sim

prov

edfo

rin

sect

prot

ectio

n, h

erbi

cide

tole

ranc

e, v

irus

resi

stan

ce, d

elay

edor

impr

oved

ripen

ing

i.e. B

tcro

ps•

19

90

: G

M f

ood

ingr

edie

nts:

bre

wer

’san

dba

ker’s

yeas

ts,

rChy

mos

inan

dsi

mila

rfo

oden

zym

es•

20

00

’s:

Intr

oduc

tion

of s

econ

dge

nera

tion

(Con

sum

er-

ben

efit

orie

nte

d) o

f G

M p

rodu

cts:

Foo

dra

wm

ater

ials

and

ingr

edie

nts

with

enha

nced

/alte

red

tech

nolo

gica

l, nu

triti

onal

and

heal

thpr

oper

ties

i.e. v

acci

ne-f

ruits

, Vi

tam

in-e

nric

hed

rice,

non

-sta

ling

brea

d.

Land

cu

ltiv

ated

wit

h t

ran

sgen

ic p

lan

ts -

1W

hol

e w

orld

19

96

-19

99

Sour

ce:

Pogn

a, 2

000

(bas

ed o

n IS

AAA

data

)

2,4

14

27,8

21,6

11,1

3,7

3,4

0,1

1996

1997

1998

1999

Soy

Cor

nC

otto

nR

ape

seed

Oth

ers*

Mill

ions

of

hect

ares

Mai

n co

untr

ies:

USA

, Ch

ina,

Can

ada,

Aus

tral

ia,

Arge

ntin

a, M

exic

o, J

apan

, Th

aila

nd, Sp

ain,

Bu

lgar

ia,

Hun

gary

* M

ainl

y po

tato

, zuc

chin

i, to

mat

o

Land

cu

ltiv

ated

wit

h t

ran

sgen

ic p

lan

ts-2

Wh

ole

wor

ld1

99

9

Tota

l = 3

9.9

Mill

ions

of

hect

ares

Corn

34,2%

Soy

46,7%

Cotto

n9,9

%

Rape

seed

9,1%

Potat

o0,1

%

USA

+ C

anad

a23

.13

Res

t of

the

wor

ld

Sour

ce:

Pogn

a, 2

000

Lan

d cu

ltiva

ted

with

tran

sgen

ic p

lant

s-3

Who

le w

orld

in 2

000

(200

2:>5

0 M

hec

tare

s)

Deb

ate

Issu

es

•Fo

od s

afet

y an

d he

alth

impl

icat

ions

;•

Envi

ronm

enta

l con

cern

s (i.

e.th

reat

ened

bi

o-di

vers

ity a

nd b

io-s

afet

y ov

er o

ur p

lane

t)•

Sett

ing

effic

ient

reg

ulat

ions

on

GM

O's

rele

ase(

i.e.la

belli

ng is

sues

)•

Pate

ntin

g is

sues

,inte

llect

ualp

rope

rty

right

s•

Ethi

cal a

nd s

ocia

l con

cern

s

Stak

ehol

ders

(Act

ors)

in d

ebat

es•

GM

O

supp

liers

:th

e "g

ene-

splic

ing”

tran

snat

ion

alco

rpor

atio

ns(

TNC

) su

ch

as

Mon

san

to,

Du

P

ont,

N

ovar

tis;

th

e fa

rmer

s w

ho

grow

GM

cro

ps,

the

foo

d-pr

oces

sors

an

d f

ood-

reta

ilers

pro

cess

ing

and

trad

ing

GM

cro

ps a

nd

food

s,

•Lo

cal g

over

nm

ents

of s

tate

s w

ho

are

resp

onsi

ble

for

re

gula

tin

g th

e n

ew t

ech

nol

ogy

in t

hei

r co

un

trie

s•

The

"ac

tivi

st"

NG

O g

rou

ps,

med

ia,

“lob

by”

grou

ps,

eth

icis

ts•

Con

sum

ers

•In

tern

atio

nal

sc

ien

tifi

cco

mm

un

ity:

R

espe

ctiv

e sc

ien

tist

s bo

th

from

in

dust

ries

an

d fr

om a

cade

mia

and

from

inte

rnat

ion

alor

gan

isat

ion

s (i

.e.F

AO

;WH

O;U

PO

V;W

TO;

OEC

D;I

LSI)

On

“Foo

d sa

fety

”an

d “h

ealth

impl

icat

ions

”

•Opp

onen

tscl

aim

:G

M m

ayin

trod

uce

:-n

ewan

tinu

trit

iona

lsu

bsta

nce

s(i

.e.n

atu

ral

toxi

can

ts)

toth

em

odif

ied

crop

,-d

ecre

ases

in n

utr

itio

nal

valu

e(vi

tam

ins,

min

eral

s)-a

lter

edpa

tter

ns

of f

ood

alle

rgie

sdu

eto

new

prot

ein

s-

anti

biot

icre

sist

ance

gen

esm

igh

tbe

tra

nsf

erre

dfr

omG

M

orga

nis

ms

toh

um

ans

•Pro

pon

ents

argu

e:

Ther

e is

no

curr

ent

evid

ence

to

su

gges

t th

at t

he

proc

ess

of

gen

etic

mod

ific

atio

n is

in

her

entl

y h

arm

ful.

Man

y of

th

eis

sues

rai

sed

for

food

s pr

odu

ced

usi

ng

gen

etic

m

odif

icat

ion

are

equ

ally

ap

plic

able

to

food

spr

odu

ced

by c

onve

nti

onal

mea

ns.

N

oth

ing

can

be

abso

lute

ly

cert

ain

in a

fie

ld o

f ra

pid

scie

nti

fic

and

tec

hn

olog

ical

de

velo

pm

ent.

Zer

ori

sk is

u

nat

tain

able

in m

oder

n li

fe.

On

“Foo

d sa

fety

”an

d “h

ealth

impl

icat

ions

”

Opp

onen

t’s

Exam

ple:

Wor

k w

as u

nd

erta

ken

at

the

Row

ett

Inst

itu

te b

y D

r P

usz

tai,

in w

hic

h p

otat

oes

wer

ege

net

ical

ly m

odif

ied

to

exp

ress

an

inse

ctic

idal

le

ctin

prot

ein

.D

r P

usz

taia

rgu

edth

atco

nsu

mpt

ion

of

thes

ege

net

ical

ly m

odif

ied

pota

toes

res

ult

edin

de

pres

sion

of

the

imm

un

e sy

stem

.

Pro

pon

ent’

sC

laim

s:•

The

Roy

alS

ocie

ty, a

fter

revi

ewin

gP

usz

tai’s

wor

k,

con

clu

ded

that

th

e w

ork

app

eare

d to

be

flaw

ed in

m

any

aspe

cts

of t

he

desi

gn

, exe

cuti

on a

nd

anal

ysis

an

d th

at n

osc

ien

tifi

cco

ncl

usi

ons

shou

ld b

e dr

awn

fro

m it

sin

ce t

her

ew

asn

o co

nvi

nci

ng

evi

den

ceof

ad

vers

e ef

fect

s du

eto

the

GM

pot

atoe

s st

udie

d.

How

saf

ety

is a

sses

sed

•P

rese

ntA

ppro

ach:

ByW

HO

&U

S:“S

ubst

anti

aleq

uiva

lenc

e”Th

e G

M f

ood

is c

ompa

red

to it

s co

nven

tion

al c

ount

erpa

rt a

ndco

nsid

erat

ion

is g

iven

to

both

the

in

tent

iona

l eff

ects

of

the

mod

ific

atio

n an

d al

so t

o an

y po

ssib

leun

inte

nded

sec

onda

ry e

ffec

ts.

This

com

pari

son

invo

lves

the

as

sess

men

t of

:-A

agro

nom

ic d

ata

deri

ved

over

a

num

ber

of g

ener

atio

ns (

such

as

crop

hei

ght,

yie

ld, f

low

erin

g pa

tter

n,

dise

ase

resi

stan

ce a

nd c

limat

ic

tole

ranc

e) ,

-Com

posi

tion

alin

form

atio

n on

nu

trie

nts

(pro

tein

s, f

ats,

ca

rboh

ydra

tes,

vit

amin

s an

d m

iner

als)

-P

ossi

ble

toxi

cant

s in

bot

h th

e pl

ant

and

any

deri

ved

food

pro

duct

.

•R

ecom

men

ded

App

roac

hB

yEU

: “P

reca

utio

nary

prin

cipl

e”·

Ris

k as

sess

men

tssh

ould

incl

ude

deta

iled

desc

ript

ion

of w

hat

the

food

is a

nd h

ow it

is p

rodu

ced;

a hi

stor

y of

any

pos

sibl

e ad

vers

e he

alth

eff

ects

link

ed t

o th

e or

gani

sm b

eing

mod

ifie

d;·

a de

taile

d de

scri

ptio

n of

the

gen

etic

m

odif

icat

ion

proc

ess;

an

eval

uati

on

of a

ny p

ossi

ble

nutr

itio

nal e

ffec

ts o

f th

e m

odif

ied

food

;·

an e

valu

atio

n of

any

tox

icol

ogic

al

effe

cts

of t

he m

odif

ied

food

;an

ev

alua

tion

of

any

adve

rse

mic

robi

olog

ical

effe

cts

of t

he

mod

ifie

d fo

od;

· an

eva

luat

ion

of a

ny d

ata

on p

eopl

e ea

ting

the

mod

ifie

d fo

ods

unde

r co

ntro

lled

cond

itio

ns;

the

amou

nts

of t

he G

M f

ood

that

peo

ple

are

likel

y to

con

sum

e, in

clud

ing

both

av

erag

ean

d ex

trem

e co

nsu

mpt

ion

leve

ls

Out

com

eof

The

EU

-US

Bio

tech

nolo

gyco

nsul

tativ

e fo

rum

: “P

reca

utio

nary

Prin

cipl

e”“P

reca

uti

onar

y de

cisi

on-m

akin

g pr

oces

s”re

quir

es:

• Ta

kin

g ac

tion

pro

port

ion

ate

to

the

nat

ure

of

the

pote

nti

al

risk

, im

posi

ng

mor

est

rin

gent

re

stri

ctio

ns

on r

isks

th

at

cou

ld h

ave

irre

vers

ible

, ca

tast

roph

icco

nseq

uen

ces

for

futu

re g

ener

atio

ns

than

ag

ain

st r

isks

wit

h m

odes

t re

perc

uss

ion

s.•

App

lyin

g m

ore

stri

nge

nt

limit

s on

ris

ks t

hat

can

not

be

reve

rsed

eas

ily. A

s th

e ri

skof

ir

reve

rsib

ility

ris

es,

man

dato

ry m

onit

orin

g fo

r sp

ecif

ic o

utc

omes

sh

ould

be

mor

e ea

sily

impo

sed.

C

onve

rsel

y, c

ontr

ols

may

be

rela

xed

wh

en t

hos

e co

nce

rns

prov

e u

nfo

un

ded.

Con

side

rati

on o

f th

e co

sts

that

cau

tion

impo

ses,

co

nse

rvin

gsc

arce

res

ourc

esan

d m

akin

g th

e be

nef

its

of

new

tec

hn

olog

ies

avai

labl

e ar

e im

port

ant

soci

etal

goa

ls.

Ther

efor

e th

e co

st t

hat

ca

uti

on im

pose

s on

the

re

gula

ted

indu

stry

shou

ldbe

are

leva

nt,

bu

t n

ever

th

e do

min

ant,

con

side

rati

on.

Wh

en s

ubs

tan

tive

u

nce

rtai

ntie

s pr

even

t ac

cura

te r

isk

asse

ssm

ent,

go

vern

men

tssh

ould

act

pr

otec

tive

ly o

n t

he

side

of

safe

ty.

“Ris

k-Be

nefit

Equa

tion”

The

EU-U

SB

iote

chn

olog

yco

nsu

ltat

ive

foru

m r

ecom

men

ded

that

it is

app

ropr

iate

toco

nsi

der,

on a

cas

e-by

-cas

e ba

sis,

th

epo

ten

tial

ris

ks a

nd

ben

efit

s of

each

new

prod

uct

, giv

en t

he

hea

lth

an

d n

utr

itio

nal

stat

us

ofth

e pe

ople

an

d th

eec

olog

ical

and

agri

cult

ural

sys

tem

s in

apa

rtic

ula

rre

gion

ofus

e.M

oreo

ver,

wh

en w

eigh

ing

risk

s an

dbe

nef

its,

the

effe

cts

of in

trod

uci

ng

gen

etic

ally

mod

ifie

dpr

odu

cts

shou

ld n

otbe

com

pare

dso

lely

to

the

stat

us

quo

(e.g

.pr

esen

tpe

stic

ide

use

), b

ut

also

to

oth

erpo

ten

tial

alte

rnat

ives

(e.

g. b

io-i

nte

nsi

vepe

stm

anag

emen

t sy

stem

s).

Exam

ple

of a

dif

fere

nt

“Ris

k-B

enef

it”

eval

uati

onm

ade

byEU

:C

ontr

ary

toG

M f

oods

, ph

arm

aceu

tica

lpro

duct

sde

rive

d fr

om b

iote

chn

olog

yar

em

uch

mor

eea

sily

appr

oved

by

the

EU.

Mor

e th

an 2

00

new

dru

gsde

rive

d fr

ombi

otec

hnol

ogy

are

curr

entl

y in

ph

ase

III

oftr

ials

(in

199

8),

hav

ing

met

wit

hal

mos

tze

ropr

otes

ts.

GM

Ph

arm

aceu

tica

lPro

duct

sal

read

yin

use

in E

U

Col

on c

ance

r tr

eatm

ent

Hu

ma

Spe

ct

Ren

al r

ejec

tion

tre

atm

ent

Sim

ulec

t

Ren

al r

ejec

tion

tre

atm

ent

Zen

epax

Hep

atit

is C

tre

atm

ent

Infe

rgen

Mal

ign

ant

hyp

erca

lcem

ia t

reat

men

t Fo

rcal

ton

in

An

tith

rom

bosi

s tr

eatm

ent

Res

cupa

se

Ther

apeu

tic

use

Pro

duct

Dia

beti

c u

lcer

s tr

eatm

ent

Reg

ran

ex

An

ti-h

aem

orra

gic

trea

tmen

tR

efac

to

Sof

t ti

ssu

e sa

rcom

a tr

eatm

ent

Ber

orn

um

Folli

cula

r ly

mph

oma

trea

tmen

t M

ab T

her

a

Pae

diat

ric

vacc

ine

agai

nst

diph

teri

tis,

tet

anu

s an

d pe

rtu

ssis

Tria

cellu

eax

ON

“B

IOD

IVER

SITY

” an

d“E

NV

IRO

NM

ENTA

L IS

SUES

”•

Opp

onen

ts’ c

laim

:M

an h

aspi

cked

up

on

ly a

bou

t 40

of

th

e t

ens

of t

hou

san

ds

of

plan

ts t

hat

gro

w o

n t

his

pla

net

fo

r su

stai

nin

g h

um

an li

fe, a

nd

even

a s

mal

ler

nu

mb

er,

just

9,

ac

cou

nts

for

mor

e th

an 7

5 %

of

all t

he p

lan

t fo

ods

on t

he

wor

ld

mar

kets

. A

larg

er-s

cale

lan

dsca

pe

hom

ogen

isat

ion

wit

h t

ran

s-ge

nic

cr

ops

only

will

incr

ease

and

inte

nsi

fyth

e ec

olog

ical

pro

blem

s al

read

y as

soci

ated

wit

h

mon

ocu

ltu

re a

gric

ult

ure

and

th

e er

osio

n o

f w

hat

rem

ain

s as

bio

-di

vers

ity

will

res

ult

in t

otal

loss

of

our

insu

ran

ce a

gain

st a

ny

futu

re

un

favo

rabl

e ec

osys

tem

ch

ange

s.

On

Food

Secu

rity

•P

ropo

nen

ts’a

rgu

emen

t:Th

e

wor

ld's

po

pula

tion

is

co

nti

nu

ing

to

grow

an

d is

pr

ojec

ted

to

reac

h 1

0 b

illio

n b

y th

e ye

ar 2

05

0,

a do

ubl

ing

tobe

ob

serv

edm

ainl

yin

th

epo

orer

nat

ion

s,

calli

ng

for

a pa

ralle

ldo

ubl

ing

of

wor

ldfo

odpr

odu

ctio

n.

Giv

enth

e co

nst

ant

acre

age

of

arab

le l

and

over

our

pl

anet

, ge

net

ical

lym

odif

ied

plan

ts

h

ave

the

hig

hes

tpo

ten

tial

fo

r in

crea

sing

th

e pr

odu

ctiv

ity

of

trad

itio

nal

ag

ricu

ltur

al

crop

s.

Th

e “G

MO

" er

aw

ill

incr

ease

w

orld

ag

ricu

ltur

al

prod

uct

ivit

y,

thus

en

han

ce f

ood

secu

rity

, an

d m

ove

agri

cult

ure

away

fr

om

a de

pen

den

ce o

n c

hem

ical

in

puts

,h

elpi

ng,

mor

eove

r,

to r

edu

ce t

hecu

rren

t en

viro

nm

enta

lpo

lluti

on

prob

lem

s .

Exa

mpl

efo

rPr

opon

ents

’ Cla

ims

Agr

oeco

logi

sts’

Cla

ims:

“Soc

iala

ndEt

hica

lIs

sues

”“T

he

real

cau

se o

f h

un

ger

in

less

erd

evel

oped

cou

ntr

ies

isn

ot ‘d

efic

ien

cyof

foo

d’ b

ut

isth

eir

pove

rty,

th

ereb

yth

eir

ineq

ual

ity

and

lack

of

acce

ss t

o fo

od a

nd

lan

d. H

ere

in t

hos

eco

un

trie

s, t

oo

man

y pe

ople

are

too

poo

r to

bu

y th

e fo

od t

hat

is

alre

ady

avai

labl

e on

ear

th s

ince

wea

lth

is v

ery

po

orly

dis

trib

ute

dan

d/or

th

ey la

ck t

he

lan

d an

d re

sou

rces

to

grow

th

eir

food

sth

emse

lves

.Th

us

GM

cro

psis

not

a s

olu

tion

. In

stea

d, s

ocia

l pr

oces

ses

em

phas

isin

g lo

calc

omm

un

ity

part

icip

atio

n a

nd

empo

wer

men

t sh

ould

be

en

cou

rage

dth

rou

ghru

ral d

evel

opm

ent

app

roac

hes

an

d lo

w-i

npu

t te

chn

olog

ies

thu

sin

crea

sin

g th

e pr

odu

ctiv

ity

and

prof

itab

ility

of

the

smal

lhol

der

farm

.”

“The

Eth

ical

Mat

rix”

Fr

omR

epor

t Of“

The

Foo

d E

thic

s Cou

ncil”

ET

HIC

IST

S an

dG

MT

heid

eaof

“co

mm

onm

oral

ity”

shou

ldap

ply:

“Eth

icsi

s abo

ut r

espe

ctin

g ot

hers

as i

ndiv

idua

ls.”

KA

NT

On

“Lab

ellin

gRe

gula

tions

”:Te

chn

ical

Pro

blem

s:•

Lack

of g

loba

l har

mon

izat

ion

in

resp

ecti

vere

gula

tion

sam

ong

trad

ing

cou

ntr

ies:

1. W

het

her

“to

labe

l”(E

U)

or“n

ot t

ola

bel”

(US

)2

. “W

hat

” to

labe

l: I

nde

fin

ing

the

basi

s of

th

e "t

oler

ance

" lim

its,

sh

ould

it b

e th

e %

of

tran

sgen

ic D

NA

in f

inal

pr

odu

ct, o

r th

e %

of

tran

sgen

ic

prot

ein

, or

th

e %

by

wei

ght

of

GM

O in

gred

ien

ts in

th

e fi

nal

prod

uct

s?

•U

nav

aila

bilit

yof

sta

nda

rdis

ed

and

easi

ly a

pplic

able

an

alyt

ical

m

eth

ods

for

det

ecti

ng

and

quan

tify

ing

GM

foo

ds(a

bsol

ute

abse

nce

of r

ec-D

NA

cam

nno

tbe

pr

oved

.)

•D

iffe

renc

esin

att

itud

es:

•EU

:•

Nov

el F

oods

an

d N

ovel

Foo

d In

gred

ien

ts (

25

8/9

7),

15

May

19

97.

•Th

e EC

reg

ula

tion

, 49/

200

0,s

etti

ng

the

de m

inim

isth

resh

old

for

labe

llin

g re

quir

emen

ts f

or f

ood

com

mod

itie

s co

nta

inin

g m

ore

than

1%

of

any

indi

vidu

al G

M-d

eriv

ed in

gred

ien

t th

at

poss

esse

s an

y ge

net

ical

ly m

odif

ied

DN

A a

nd

prot

ein

.U

S:

•N

o G

ener

al R

equ

irem

ent

to L

abel

(If

safe

, wh

yst

igm

atiz

eth

epr

odu

ct?)

>7

0 P

erce

nt

of F

oods

Con

tain

GM

Os

(To

Eat

in A

mer

ica

is t

o Ea

t G

MO

s)•

U.S

. Eat

s W

hat

It

Expo

rts:

Jan

., 2

001

: G

M F

ood

deve

lope

rsh

ould

not

ify

FDA

1

20

day

sbe

fore

putt

ing

on t

hem

arke

t, a

nd

volu

nta

ryla

belli

ng

for

impr

oved

qual

ity

trai

ts.

On

Pate

ntin

gIs

sues

(IPR

’s)

•Pro

pon

ents

clai

m:

•TR

IPS

(Tra

de-r

elat

edin

telle

ctu

alpr

oper

ty

syst

em)

sch

emes

ar

e in

ten

ded

to

prov

ide

asy

stem

that

ensu

res

a fa

irre

turn

on

inve

stm

ents

mad

e in

res

earc

han

dn

ovel

inve

ntio

ns.

Wit

hh

oldi

ng

IP p

rote

ctio

n f

or

GM

inn

ovat

ions

w

ith

the

pote

nti

al

toim

prov

eag

ricu

ltu

re

will

ri

sk

putt

ing

the

rela

ted

indu

stry

at

a

com

peti

tive

di

sadv

anta

gew

ith

firm

s w

hic

h

did

not

in

vest

in

G

Mre

sear

chan

d sl

ow

thei

r pa

ce

of

furt

her

rese

arch

.

•O

ppon

ents

argu

e:•

IPR

’sh

ave

pote

nti

al f

or t

o fo

ster

m

onop

olie

s on

pl

ant

gen

etic

m

ater

ial

orge

rmpl

asm

s.

In

deve

lopi

ng

cou

ntr

ies,

con

trov

ersi

es

incl

ude

th

e im

plic

atio

ns o

f pa

ten

ts

for

food

sec

uri

ty a

nd

mee

tin

g th

e ba

sic

food

nee

ds o

f th

e po

or.

•Th

e di

verg

ence

s in

op

inio

n

over

w

het

her

th

e“W

orld

’spl

ants

an

d an

imal

s”sh

ould

be

pate

nte

d at

all

al

so

carr

y so

me

eth

ical

as

wel

l as

pr

acti

cal

impl

icat

ion

s, s

ince

acc

ess

to

any

pate

nte

d

mat

eria

ls

and

proc

esse

s is

be

ing

seve

rely

re

stri

cted

to

the

rest

of

the

Wor

ld

by

ag

ro-c

hem

ical

G

M

TNC

'sth

rou

gh t

hei

r lic

ensi

ng

agre

emen

ts.

“Pri

vati

sati

onof

w

orld

’sge

net

icre

sou

rces

”

InG

M f

oods

area

, tw

o T

RIP

S (t

rade

-rel

ated

inte

llect

ual

prop

erty

) sy

stem

sha

vebe

ende

velo

ped:

thos

e w

hich

ena

ble

the

tech

nolo

gy,

and

appl

icat

ion

pate

nts

whi

chco

ver

spec

ific

trai

ts f

or i

mpr

ovin

g pl

ants

but

whi

ch a

re d

epen

dent

on

the

enab

ling

pate

nts

for

thei

r im

plem

enta

tion.

Conc

lusi

on•

Gen

etic

ally

-mod

ifie

dfo

ods

mig

ht

hav

eth

ep

oten

tial

toco

ntr

ibu

teto

the

solu

tion

of w

orld

'sh

un

ger

and

mal

nu

trit

ion

prob

lem

s, a

nd

toh

elp

prot

ect

and

pres

erve

the

envi

ron

men

tby

incr

easi

ng

yiel

dan

dre

duci

ng

relia

nce

up

onch

emic

alpe

stic

ides

and

her

bici

des.

•Y

et t

her

ear

em

any

chal

len

ges

ahea

dfo

rgo

vern

men

ts,

espe

cial

lyin

th

ear

eas

of s

afet

yte

stin

g, r

egu

lati

on,

inte

rnat

ion

alp

olic

yse

ttin

gan

dfo

odla

belin

g.

•“G

enet

icen

gin

eeri

ng”

see

ms

tobe

th

ein

evit

able

wav

eof

th

efu

ture

and

we

can

not

aff

ord

toig

nor

ea

tech

nolo

gyth

atpr

omis

essu

chp

oten

tial

ben

efit

s.

How

ever

, we

mu

stpr

ocee

dw

ith

cau

tion

toav

oid

cau

sin

gu

nin

ten

ded

har

mto

hu

man

hea

lth

and

the

envi

ron

men

tas

a r

esu

ltof

usi

ng

this

pow

erfu

lte

chn

olog

y.