Genetically modified animals have even been used to grow transplant tissues and human transplant organs, a concept called xenotransplantation. The rich variety of uses for GMOs provides a number of valuable benefits to humans, but many people also worry about potential risks. Despite the fact that the genes being transferred occur naturally in other species, there are unknown consequences to altering the natural state of an organism through foreign gene expression. These consequences influence not only the GMO itself, but also the natural environment in which that organism is allowed to proliferate.
Potential health risks to humans include the possibility of exposure to new allergens in genetically modified foods, as well as the transfer of antibiotic-resistant genes to gut flora.
Horizontal gene transfer of pesticide, herbicide, or antibiotic resistance to other organisms would not only put humans at risk , but it would also cause ecological imbalances, allowing previously innocuous plants to grow uncontrolled, thus promoting the spread of disease among both plants and animals.
Although the possibility of horizontal gene transfer between GMOs and other organisms cannot be denied, in reality, this risk is considered to be quite low. Horizontal gene transfer occurs naturally at a very low rate and, in most cases, cannot be simulated in an optimized laboratory environment without active modification of the target genome to increase susceptibility Ma et al.
The enhanced mating advantages of the genetically modified fish led to a reduction in the viability of their offspring. Thus, when a new transgene is introduced into a wild fish population, it propagates and may eventually threaten the viability of both the wild-type and the genetically modified organisms.
One example of public debate over the use of a genetically modified plant involves the case of Bt corn. Bt corn expresses a protein from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis.
Prior to construction of the recombinant corn, the protein had long been known to be toxic to a number of pestiferous insects, including the monarch caterpillar, and it had been successfully used as an environmentally friendly insecticide for several years. The benefit of the expression of this protein by corn plants is a reduction in the amount of insecticide that farmers must apply to their crops.
Unfortunately, seeds containing genes for recombinant proteins can cause unintentional spread of recombinant genes or exposure of non-target organisms to new toxic compounds in the environment.
The now-famous Bt corn controversy started with a laboratory study by Losey et al. The report by Losey et al. Debate ensued when scientists from other laboratories disputed the study, citing the extremely high concentration of pollen used in the laboratory study as unrealistic, and concluding that migratory patterns of monarchs do not place them in the vicinity of corn during the time it sheds pollen.
For the next two years, six teams of researchers from government, academia, and industry investigated the issue and concluded that the risk of Bt corn to monarchs was "very low" Sears et al. Environmental Protection Agency to approve Bt corn for an additional seven years.
Another concern associated with GMOs is that private companies will claim ownership of the organisms they create and not share them at a reasonable cost with the public.
If these claims are correct, it is argued that use of genetically modified crops will hurt the economy and environment, because monoculture practices by large-scale farm production centers who can afford the costly seeds will dominate over the diversity contributed by small farmers who can't afford the technology. However, a recent meta-analysis of 15 studies reveals that, on average, two-thirds of the benefits of first-generation genetically modified crops are shared downstream, whereas only one-third accrues upstream Demont et al.
These benefit shares are exhibited in both industrial and developing countries. Therefore, the argument that private companies will not share ownership of GMOs is not supported by evidence from first-generation genetically modified crops. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, public acceptance trends in Europe and Asia are mixed depending on the country and current mood at the time of the survey Hoban, Attitudes toward cloning, biotechnology, and genetically modified products differ depending upon people's level of education and interpretations of what each of these terms mean.
Support varies for different types of biotechnology; however, it is consistently lower when animals are mentioned. Furthermore, even if the technologies are shared fairly, there are people who would still resist consumable GMOs, even with thorough testing for safety, because of personal or religious beliefs.
The ethical issues surrounding GMOs include debate over our right to "play God," as well as the introduction of foreign material into foods that are abstained from for religious reasons. Some people believe that tampering with nature is intrinsically wrong, and others maintain that inserting plant genes in animals, or vice versa, is immoral. When it comes to genetically modified foods, those who feel strongly that the development of GMOs is against nature or religion have called for clear labeling rules so they can make informed selections when choosing which items to purchase.
Respect for consumer choice and assumed risk is as important as having safeguards to prevent mixing of genetically modified products with non-genetically modified foods. In order to determine the requirements for such safeguards, there must be a definitive assessment of what constitutes a GMO and universal agreement on how products should be labeled.
These issues are increasingly important to consider as the number of GMOs continues to increase due to improved laboratory techniques and tools for sequencing whole genomes, better processes for cloning and transferring genes, and improved understanding of gene expression systems.
Thus, legislative practices that regulate this research have to keep pace. Prior to permitting commercial use of GMOs, governments perform risk assessments to determine the possible consequences of their use, but difficulties in estimating the impact of commercial GMO use makes regulation of these organisms a challenge.
In , the first debate over the risks to humans of exposure to GMOs began when a common intestinal microorganism, E. Initially, safety issues were a concern to individuals working in laboratories with GMOs, as well as nearby residents. However, later debate arose over concerns that recombinant organisms might be used as weapons. The growing debate, initially restricted to scientists, eventually spread to the public, and in , the National Institutes of Health NIH established the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee to begin to address some of these issues.
In the s, when deliberate releases of GMOs to the environment were beginning to occur, the U. Adherence to the guidelines provided by the NIH was voluntary for industry. Also during the s, the use of transgenic plants was becoming a valuable endeavor for production of new pharmaceuticals, and individual companies, institutions, and whole countries were beginning to view biotechnology as a lucrative means of making money Devos et al.
Worldwide commercialization of biotech products sparked new debate over the patentability of living organisms, the adverse effects of exposure to recombinant proteins, confidentiality issues, the morality and credibility of scientists, the role of government in regulating science, and other issues. In the U. This document recommended that risk assessments be performed on a case-by-case basis. Since then, the case-by-case approach to risk assessment for genetically modified products has been widely accepted; however, the U.
Biotechnology can help us develop new, more resilient crop varieties that are better able to survive these changing conditions. The GMOs under development today, along with improved conventional farming methods and new biologic crop protection products, will help us meet the challenges of tomorrow.
Skip to Main Content Bioformulation. Loading Social Share Tool In fact, GM food products are among the most tested products in history. Learn how we're advancing the science of Bioformulation Biotechnology can be used to make foods more nutritious. For example: This tomato was engineered to produce higher levels of nutrients called anthocyanins, which have been shown to be protective against a wide variety of human diseases. You may be trying to access this site from a secured browser on the server.
Please enable scripts and reload this page. Quick Links. Why do we use GMOs? Do GMOs harm health? How do GMOs affect insects? DP: No doubt. Our ecosystems have evolved to work in balance. Whenever harmful chemicals like glyphosate are introduced into an ecosystem, this disrupts the natural processes that keep our environment healthy. Other studies that have looked at the pesticide levels in groundwaters reported that 53 percent of their sampling sites contained one or more pesticides.
So the fact that GM seeds now account for more than 50 percent of global glyphosate usage is certainly concerning. Perhaps even more importantly, though, is that these chemicals are harming the soil microbiome. We are just now beginning to recognize that the various organisms living in the soil act to protect plants and make them more disease resistant. We now recognize that plants, like animals, are not autonomous, but rather exist in a symbiotic relationship with diverse microorganisms.
Plants are vitally dependent upon soil microbes for their health and disease resistance. Meanwhile, we need to reduce the carbon emissions, water pollution, erosion, and other environmental impacts associated with agriculture, and avoid expanding food production into wild areas that other species need for habitat.
It also helps us work with important food crops like bananas, which are very difficult to improve through conventional breeding methods. We certainly can feed more people by reducing food waste and improving food distribution and storage systems worldwide. The social and environmental problems that we face today are unprecedented in scale and scope.
We must use all the tools available to address the challenge of feeding the world while taking care of the environment. GMOs can play a part. The reality of the situation is that GM crops have actually not increased the yield of any major commercialized food source.
In fact, soy — the most widely grown genetically modified crop — is actually experiencing reduced yields. The promise of increased yield potentials with GM crops is one that we have not realized.
Another important consideration in terms of food security is the reduction of waste. Leading health commentators, like Dr.
0コメント