Upload
everett-pitts
View
222
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The AgBiotech The AgBiotech ControversyControversy
Alan McHughen, D.Phil., Alan McHughen, D.Phil., University of CaliforniaUniversity of California
Riverside, Ca USARiverside, Ca USA
[email protected]@ucr.edu
Would a tomato Would a tomato with a fish gene with a fish gene taste “fishy”?taste “fishy”?
a.a. YesYes
b.b. NoNo
If you ate a GM If you ate a GM fruit, might it alter fruit, might it alter
your genes?your genes?a.a. YesYes
b.b. NoNo
Can animal Can animal genes be inserted genes be inserted
into a plant?into a plant?a.a. YesYes
b.b. NoNo
Give an example Give an example of GM food on of GM food on
the marketthe marketa.a. There are noneThere are none
b.b. All foods are GMAll foods are GM
c.c. TomatoTomato
d.d. WheatWheat
e.e. SquashSquash
f.f. PapayaPapaya
Survey results (% Survey results (% Correct)Correct)
Are GM foods in US Are GM foods in US supermarkets?supermarkets?
Do ordinary tomatoes Do ordinary tomatoes contain genes?contain genes?
Would a tomato with a Would a tomato with a fish gene taste “fishy”?fish gene taste “fishy”?
If you ate a GM fruit, If you ate a GM fruit, might it alter your might it alter your genes?genes?
Can animal genes be Can animal genes be inserted into a plant?inserted into a plant?
Give an example of GM Give an example of GM food on the marketfood on the market
48 % 48 % 404042424545303079% 79%
TomatoesTomatoes
Consequences of poor Consequences of poor public understanding of public understanding of
sciencescience Public opinion drives policyPublic opinion drives policy Ignorance of science results in bad science Ignorance of science results in bad science
policypolicy Topical political issues demand good science:Topical political issues demand good science:
Stem cell research, Nanotechnology, Stem cell research, Nanotechnology, Climate change, GM foods, Climate change, GM foods, Pharmaceuticals, Pesticides, Cell phones, Pharmaceuticals, Pesticides, Cell phones, Biodiversity, Fuel cell technology, Biodiversity, Fuel cell technology, Biological weapons, Evolution in schools, Biological weapons, Evolution in schools, etc. etc.
Examples of poor scientific Examples of poor scientific literacyliteracy
World: Cartagena Protocol 9/11/2003World: Cartagena Protocol 9/11/2003 “…“…prevents or reduces the risks (of prevents or reduces the risks (of
LMOs) LMOs) to biological diversity, taking also to biological diversity, taking also into account risks to human health .”into account risks to human health .”
Philippines: effect of Bt cornfieldsPhilippines: effect of Bt cornfields Zambia: GM food is ‘poison”Zambia: GM food is ‘poison” Africa (south): cure for HIV/AIDSAfrica (south): cure for HIV/AIDS Africa (north): GM foods and CIAAfrica (north): GM foods and CIA
Need for public science Need for public science literacyliteracy
Public perceptions are often based Public perceptions are often based on:on: Invalid assumptionsInvalid assumptions
Failure to apply critical thinkingFailure to apply critical thinking
Lack of context (e.g. chemicals).Lack of context (e.g. chemicals).
Where do people get Where do people get information?information?
““GE (rDNA) is unnatural because it GE (rDNA) is unnatural because it breaks the nature’s species barrier that breaks the nature’s species barrier that precludes genes moving from one precludes genes moving from one species to another”species to another”
““DNA is a complex protein” DNA is a complex protein” ““GMOs commercialized with 3 mos to 3 GMOs commercialized with 3 mos to 3
yrs field testing and no long-term safety yrs field testing and no long-term safety and environment studies.”and environment studies.”
What species barrier? What species barrier? Approx 38% of wheat has Approx 38% of wheat has
rye DNArye DNA
Friebe et al., Crop Science 39:1692-1696 (1999)
CHAPTER 10A.15 PROHIBITION ON THE CHAPTER 10A.15 PROHIBITION ON THE PROPAGATION, CULTIVATION, RAISING PROPAGATION, CULTIVATION, RAISING
AND GROWING OF GENETICALLY AND GROWING OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS IN MENDOCINO MODIFIED ORGANISMS IN MENDOCINO
COUNTYCOUNTY The people of Mendocino County wish to The people of Mendocino County wish to protect the County’s agriculture, protect the County’s agriculture, environment, economy, and private environment, economy, and private property from genetic pollution by property from genetic pollution by genetically modified organisms. (Measure genetically modified organisms. (Measure H-2004, passed March 2, 2004.)H-2004, passed March 2, 2004.)
Sec. 10A.15.030 Definitions.Sec. 10A.15.030 Definitions. (B) “DNA” or “deoxyribonucleic acid” (B) “DNA” or “deoxyribonucleic acid”
means a complex protein…means a complex protein…
Documented benefits of Documented benefits of biotech cropsbiotech crops
FarmersFarmers Increased yields (especially in developing Increased yields (especially in developing
countries)countries) Decreased chemical input costsDecreased chemical input costs Cleaner fields, less dockageCleaner fields, less dockage Less fuel usedLess fuel used Less tillageLess tillage Fewer adverse health effects (esp. China)Fewer adverse health effects (esp. China) Increased income ($44Billion 1996- 2006).Increased income ($44Billion 1996- 2006).
Why poorer farmers grow Why poorer farmers grow GM cropsGM crops
Philippines (Bt corn)Philippines (Bt corn) ~30% increase in yield~30% increase in yield
South Africa (Bt cotton, Bt maize)South Africa (Bt cotton, Bt maize) ~77% higher returns (smaller farm = higher ~77% higher returns (smaller farm = higher
benefit)benefit) China (Bt cotton)China (Bt cotton)
8-10% Higher yields8-10% Higher yields Reduction in farm labor poisoningsReduction in farm labor poisonings
India (Bt cotton)India (Bt cotton) ~70% drop in pesticide exposure~70% drop in pesticide exposure Shift in pesticide way from older, mote toxic Shift in pesticide way from older, mote toxic
onesones Increased yieldsIncreased yields
Documented benefits of Documented benefits of biotech cropsbiotech crops
ConsumersConsumers Safer food (less mycotoxin in maize, esp Safer food (less mycotoxin in maize, esp
Africa/Asia)Africa/Asia) Safer food (greater regulatory scrutiny)Safer food (greater regulatory scrutiny) Less pesticideLess pesticide Environmental benefits.Environmental benefits.
Documented benefits of Documented benefits of biotech cropsbiotech crops
EnvironmentEnvironment Less pesticide burdenLess pesticide burden Safer pesticidesSafer pesticides Improved soil from less tillageImproved soil from less tillage Less fuel usageLess fuel usage Increased biodiversityIncreased biodiversity
Sources: NCFAP, Plant Biotechnology, June 2002; November Sources: NCFAP, Plant Biotechnology, June 2002; November 20042004
Canola Council of Canada, An agronomic and economic Canola Council of Canada, An agronomic and economic assessment of transgenic canola, 2001assessment of transgenic canola, 2001
Munkvold, G.P., Hellmich, R.L., and Rice, L.G. 1999. Munkvold, G.P., Hellmich, R.L., and Rice, L.G. 1999. Comparison of fumonisin concentrations in kernels of Comparison of fumonisin concentrations in kernels of transgenic Bt maize hybrids and non-transgenic hybrids. Plant transgenic Bt maize hybrids and non-transgenic hybrids. Plant Dis. 83:130-138.Dis. 83:130-138.
Biotech opportunitiesBiotech opportunities
Health and NutritionHealth and Nutrition Removal of allergensRemoval of allergens Removal of anti-nutritional substancesRemoval of anti-nutritional substances Removal of pathogens and contaminantsRemoval of pathogens and contaminants
Mycotoxins in Bt cornMycotoxins in Bt corn Signal for pathogens (with nanotech)Signal for pathogens (with nanotech) Enhance nutrient content Enhance nutrient content
““Golden rice” with Golden rice” with ββ-carotene-carotene India’s “Protato” with increased protein.India’s “Protato” with increased protein.
Biotech opportunitiesBiotech opportunities
EnvironmentEnvironment Reduced pesticide loadReduced pesticide load More food/feed on less landMore food/feed on less land Better resource efficiencyBetter resource efficiency
Water useWater use Climate change adaptations.Climate change adaptations.
Biotech opportunitiesBiotech opportunities
Sustainable developmentSustainable development Sustainability in poorer countriesSustainability in poorer countries
PhilippinesPhilippines South AfricaSouth Africa
Diversification at home and abroadDiversification at home and abroad Specialty crops Specialty crops Improvement of local crops. Improvement of local crops.
Controversy remains…Controversy remains…
Legitimate question:Legitimate question:
Is it safe? Is it safe? Safe for environmentSafe for environment Safe for food and feed.Safe for food and feed.
Crossing of existing approved plant varieties*
*includes all methods of breeding
Conventional pollen based crossing of closely related species
Selection from a heterogenous population
rDNA via Agrobacterium , transfer of genes from closely related species
Mutation breeding, chemical mutagenesis, ionizing radiation
Somatic hybridization
Somaclonal variation (SCV)
rDNA biolistic, transfer of genes from closely related species
rDNA biolistic, transfer of genes from distantly related species
Conventional pollen based crossing of distantly related species or embryo rescue
Selection from a homogenous population
rDNA via Agrobacterium , transfer of genes from distantly related species
Likelihood of unintended effects (arbitrary scale)Less likely More likely
NAS/IOM findingsNAS/IOM findings
There are NO documented adverse There are NO documented adverse health effects from eating GE foods.health effects from eating GE foods. Allegations of harm are unfoundedAllegations of harm are unfounded
Genetic engineering is NOT inherently Genetic engineering is NOT inherently hazardous.hazardous.
Paradigm shift: The Paradigm shift: The disconnectdisconnect
Process vs productProcess vs product Fear derived from Fear derived from processprocess Hazard comes from Hazard comes from productproduct
Absolute vs relativeAbsolute vs relative To some, GE is absolutely novel and To some, GE is absolutely novel and
incomparable to previous hazards or incomparable to previous hazards or technologies.technologies.
To scientific community, GE is an To scientific community, GE is an extension of previous gene manipulation extension of previous gene manipulation technologies.technologies.
Traditional approach to Traditional approach to RiskRisk
ComponentComponent Risk Risk
AssessmentAssessment Risk Risk
ManagementManagement Risk Risk
CommunicationCommunication
ResponsibiliResponsibilityty
ScientistsScientists RegulatorsRegulators No one, No one,
everyone, ???everyone, ???
Who should be Who should be responsibleresponsible
for risk communication?for risk communication?a. Scientists, Academicsa. Scientists, Academics
b. Governmentb. Government
c. Industryc. Industry
d. NGOsd. NGOs
Modern Approach to Risk Modern Approach to Risk AssessmentAssessment
Science drivenScience driven Real riskReal risk Substantial Substantial
equivalenceequivalence ObjectiveObjective Relative Relative
““Prove it as safe Prove it as safe as…”as…”
ProductProduct
Values drivenValues driven Perceived riskPerceived risk Precautionary Precautionary
PrinciplePrinciple SubjectiveSubjective AbsoluteAbsolute
““Prove it safe.”Prove it safe.” ProcessProcess
Science vs. Non-scienceScience vs. Non-science Non-scientific approachNon-scientific approach
Starts with conclusion, searches for evidence Starts with conclusion, searches for evidence to support it (to support it (cherry pickingcherry picking))
Discredits alternative viewsDiscredits alternative views Often lacks contextOften lacks context
Scientific approach (Scientific approach (n.b. not all scientistsn.b. not all scientists)) Collects and analyses all available evidence Collects and analyses all available evidence
before (perhaps) reaching conclusionbefore (perhaps) reaching conclusion Actively seeks alternative interpretationsActively seeks alternative interpretations Is his/her own greatest criticIs his/her own greatest critic AppliesApplies Critical thinking skills. Critical thinking skills.
Problem of contextProblem of context
““Fear uncouples rational and critical Fear uncouples rational and critical thinking” thinking” E.g. use of pesticides in agricultureE.g. use of pesticides in agriculture
““Natural” products are invariably safe.Natural” products are invariably safe. Synthetic chemicals are invariably Synthetic chemicals are invariably
hazardoushazardous Toxicology doesn’t matter: Toxicology doesn’t matter:
all all chemicals are equally hazardouschemicals are equally hazardous Amount doesn’t matter: Amount doesn’t matter:
anyany amount is too much. amount is too much.
Fear and loathing:Fear and loathing:the context of riskthe context of risk
Roanoke (Va) Roanoke (Va) Times (9/20/2004)Times (9/20/2004): : “Mellisa Williamson, 35… worries “Mellisa Williamson, 35… worries about the effect on her unborn child about the effect on her unborn child from the sound of jackhammers.’ from the sound of jackhammers.’
Is Ms Williamson (or other similarly Is Ms Williamson (or other similarly concerned parents) likely to feed GMO concerned parents) likely to feed GMO babyfood to her child?babyfood to her child?
Pregnant Mellisa worries Pregnant Mellisa worries about noiseabout noise
(What’s wrong with this (What’s wrong with this picture?)picture?)
Scientific fact as common Scientific fact as common currencycurrency
Science is a search for Science is a search for TRUTHTRUTH Science evaluates all available evidence before Science evaluates all available evidence before
(maybe) reaching a conclusion(maybe) reaching a conclusion Non-science starts with a conclusion, then Non-science starts with a conclusion, then
seeks supporting evidence (and rejects seeks supporting evidence (and rejects contrary evidence)contrary evidence)
Value neutralValue neutral But access may influence valuesBut access may influence values
Facts are not subject to democracy or Facts are not subject to democracy or whim of fashion/popular opinion.whim of fashion/popular opinion. Indiana considered rounding Pi to 3.0Indiana considered rounding Pi to 3.0 Mendocino County redefined DNA as a Mendocino County redefined DNA as a
protein.protein.
Science vs NatureScience vs Nature
Science is the knowledge of NatureScience is the knowledge of Nature Technology Technology mightmight be used to fight Nature be used to fight Nature Technology Technology mightmight be used to support Nature be used to support Nature
Human blood transfusionsHuman blood transfusions Air conditioning, irrigation, water purification, etc.Air conditioning, irrigation, water purification, etc.
Homo sapiensHomo sapiens population >6.5 billion + population >6.5 billion + Holding capacity of Earth: 3-4 billion humansHolding capacity of Earth: 3-4 billion humans
What do we do?What do we do?
Should Should science/technology be science/technology be used to fight climate used to fight climate
change?change?a.a. YesYes
b.b. NoNo
Future ProspectFuture Prospect
Applications of biotechnology will Applications of biotechnology will increase,increase, Especially in AgricultureEspecially in Agriculture Also in Medical, Industrial, etc.Also in Medical, Industrial, etc.
Outcome for society at largeOutcome for society at large Division between science literate and Division between science literate and
illiterate?illiterate? Informed vs ignorant?Informed vs ignorant? The ignorant still get to vote!The ignorant still get to vote!
Should people ignorant Should people ignorant of issues be allowed to of issues be allowed to
vote?vote?a. Yesa. Yes
b. Nob. No
ConclusionsConclusions
Biotechnology is a tool with no greater Biotechnology is a tool with no greater potential risks than other breeding methodspotential risks than other breeding methods
But does provide opportunities for goodBut does provide opportunities for good Each application of Biotechnology must be Each application of Biotechnology must be
individually and properly evaluatedindividually and properly evaluated Biotechnology may serve objectives of Biotechnology may serve objectives of
environmental, agronomic, and economic environmental, agronomic, and economic sustainabilitysustainability
Biotechnology is not a panacea but also Biotechnology is not a panacea but also cannot be categorically rejected or ignored.cannot be categorically rejected or ignored.
ConclusionConclusion
Scientists provide informationScientists provide information And context (e.g., that nature also transfers And context (e.g., that nature also transfers
genes)genes) Society, not scientists, makes decisionsSociety, not scientists, makes decisions
But must have accurate information But must have accurate information Scientists have professional Scientists have professional
responsibilitiesresponsibilities To conduct work in an ethically sound To conduct work in an ethically sound
mannermanner To inform, but not advocate, policy.To inform, but not advocate, policy.