Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 142.177.94.73 (talk) at 16:07, 1 February 2003 (link to article on genetic modification itself (this one should stick to current controversies)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

A genetically modified organism or GMO is any organism that has had its DNA modified in a laboratory rather than through cross-pollination or other forms of evolution. For instance, a bell pepper may have DNA from a fish added to it to make it more drought-tolerant, or a bacterium may have its DNA modified to allow it to metabolize petroleum, for use in cleaning up oil spills.

Controversy

Genetic modification itself, beyond current genetic manipulation methods, is the subject of considerable controversy in its own right - some believe that the technology itself ought not to be used in any form.

Genetic modification within agriculture is an issue of some contention in the United States, the European Union and most other countries.

Proponents of genetic modification argue that it allows great advances in agriculture (for instance, making plants more tolerant of certain diseases or of water shortages), as well as allowing other beneficial creations such as the petroleum-eating bacteria. Detractors generally argue that the ultimate results of releasing genetically modified organisms are not predictable and may have unexpected and irreversible effects on the environment; since genetically modified organisms are patentable under U.S. law, GMO crops can in fact harm agriculture instead, by leaving independent farmers unable to purchase seed each year.

These concerns can have varying impact, depending on particular national circumstances. Some argue that the patent issue is not necessary valid in developed nations as some hybrid crops seeds are likely to be purchased anyway (e.g. corn).

Proponents typically dismiss published concerns as bad science and alarmism. They state that genetic modification offers enormous benefits in terms of improved agricultural efficiency and the resulting beneficial health effects of better nutrition. Opponents typically point to the many unstudied issues and warn that mistaken assumptions about safety could result in disaster. This controversy is many years from being resolved.

Genetic modification is allowed in the United States on the principle that it has not been proven dangerous; GMO foods are common in the United States and estimates of their market saturation vary widely. Many countries in Europe have taken the opposite position: that genetic modification has not been proven safe, and therefore that they will not accept genetically modified food from the United States or any other country. This issue has already gone before the World Trade Organization, which determined that not allowing GMO food into the country created an unnecessary obstacle to international trade.

It is almost certainly true that not all genetic modifications have the same effects on health or on the environment; those policies that classify all genetic modifications as good or bad are thus overgeneralized. However, indefinite postponement of policy decisions may not be in the public interest.

The standard agricultural practice of applying certain (but not all) pesticides to crop plants has been shown (cite the research) to result in short- and long-term harmful effects in humans. There is therefore some question as to whether genetically-modified crops that confer pest resistance might be harmful to humans as well. Current pest-resistant strains use a relatively innocuous toxic protein derived from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). However, harmfulness is an area of great controversy not only among the general public, but among scientists as well.

References:

• http://www.biotech-info.net/pusztai_article.html reviews a number of toxicologic studies and concludes that there were design and/or model flaws in most.

• http://www.aces.uiuc.edu/~asap/expanded/gmo/sci_main.html describes more of the controversy, also citing studies.

Recent evidence shows that genetically-modified plants may "escape" from fields in which they were planted and out-compete unmodified plants in surrounding fields.

References:

• BBC News article http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/753586.stm by environment correspondent Alex Kirby. Discusses possible pollen escape in the U.K. and includes links to other articles on the same topic.

• Allison Snow, an Ohio State University professor who received Scientific American¹s first annual Research Leader in Agriculture award, has reported (http://www.osu.edu/researchnews/archive/sungene.htm) on several studies showing the strengthening of weeds due to genetic escape of the Bt variant.

See Also

genetic engineering, genetic modification, environmentalism, gene therapy, pesticide, bt corn, protein engineering