GENETIC ENGINEERING

health and safety effects

 NUTRITION
o Rice does not contain adequate amounts of all necessary nutrients to prevent
malnutrition
o If rice could be genetically engineered to contain additional vitamins and
minerals, nutrient deficiencies could be alleviated
o For example, blindness due to vitamin A deficiency is a common problem in
third world countries. Researchers at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
Institute for Plant Sciences have created a strain of "golden" rice containing an
unusually high content of beta-carotene (vitamin A). Since this rice was funded
by the Rockefeller Foundation, a non-profit organization, the Institute hopes to
offer the golden rice seed free to any third world country that requests it. Plans
were underway to develop golden rice that also has increased iron content.
However, the grant that funded the creation of these two rice strains was not
renewed, perhaps because of the vigorous anti-GM food protesting in Europe,
and so this nutritionally-enhanced rice may not come to market at all.

 PHARMACEUTICALS
o Medicines and vaccines often are costly to produce and sometimes require
special storage conditions not readily available in third world countries
o Researchers are working to develop edible vaccines in tomatoes and potatoes
o These vaccines will be much easier to ship, store and administer than
traditional injectable vaccines

 CAUSES ALLERGIC REACTION (ALLERGENICITY)

o Many children in the US and Europe have developed life-threatening allergies
to peanuts and other foods
o It is possible that introducing a gene into a plant may create a new allergen or
cause an allergic reaction in susceptible individuals
o A proposal to incorporate a gene from Brazil nuts into soybeans was
abandoned because of the fear of causing unexpected allergic reactions
o Extensive testing of GM foods may be required to avoid the possibility of harm
to consumers with food allergies

1
GENETIC ENGINEERING
 UNKNOWN (LONG TERM) EFFECTS ON HUMAN HEALTH
o Introducing foreign genes into food plants may have an unexpected and
negative impact on human health
o A recent article published in Lancet examined the effects of GM potatoes on
the digestive tract in rats
o This study claimed that there were appreciable differences in the intestines of
rats fed GM potatoes and rats fed unmodified potatoes

 Gene transfer from GM foods to cells of the body or to bacteria in the

gastrointestinal tract may have ADVERSE EFFECTS ON HUMAN HEALTH
o This would be relevant if antibiotic resistance genes, used in creating GM
foods, were to be transferred
o The movement of genes from GM plants into conventional crops or related
species in the wild (outcrossing), as well as the mixing of crops derived from
conventional seeds with those grown using GM crops, may have an indirect
effect on food safety and food security
o Strategy adopted by countries to reduce mixing—using a clear separation of
the fields within which GM crops and conventional crops are grown.

 GENE MUTATION—scientists do not know if the forced insertion of one gene into
another gene could destabilize the entire organism, and encourage mutations and
abnormalities. Likewise, no one knows if or how eating mutated food could affect
people’s own DNA
 ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE—almost all GE food contains antibiotic resistance marker
genes that help producers know whether the new genetic material was transferred
to the host plant or animal. GE food could make disease-causing bacteria even more
resistant to antibiotics, which could increase the spread of disease throughout the
world
 LOSS OF NUTRITION—genetic engineering may change the nutritional value of food

2
GENETIC ENGINEERING

environmental issues
 UNINTENDED HARM TO OTHER ORGANISMS
o Last year a laboratory study was published in Nature showing that pollen from
B.t. corn caused high mortality rates in monarch butterfly caterpillars
o Monarch caterpillars consume milkweed plants, if pollen from B.t. corn is
blown by the wind onto milkweed plants in neighboring fields, the caterpillars
could eat the pollen and perish
o B.t. toxins kill many species of insect larvae indiscriminately; it is not possible
to design a B.t. toxin that would only kill crop-damaging pests and remain
harmless to all other insects

 REDUCED EFFECTIVENESS OF PESTICIDES

o Just as some populations of mosquitoes developed resistance to the now-
banned pesticide DDT, many people are concerned that insects will become
resistant to B.t. or other crops that have been genetically-modified to produce
their own pesticides

 GENE TRANSFER TO NON-TARGET SPECIES

o Crop plants engineered for herbicide tolerance and weeds will cross-breed,
resulting in the transfer of the herbicide resistance genes from the crops into
the weeds
o These "superweeds" would then be herbicide tolerant as well
o Other introduced genes may cross over into non-modified crops planted next
to GM crops

 The reduction in the spectrum of other plants including loss of biodiversity

 Increased use of chemicals in agriculture
 Transgenic plants could be developed to have unique characteristics for waste
destruction
 High spatial resolution, stand-off reporting, ready scaling to large treatment areas,
and continuous real-time monitoring system for contaminants in the natural
environment

3
GENETIC ENGINEERING

ethical issues
 Are we blurring the lines between species by creating transgenic combinations?
 What are the known health risks associated with transgenics?
 What are the long-term effects on the environment when transgenics are released in
the field?
 What ethical, social, and legal controls or reviews should be placed on such research?

 TRANSGENIC BIOTECHNOLOGY PRESENTS CHALLENGES

o Are we inflicting pain and suffering on sentient creatures when we create
certain types of chimeras?
o Will transgenic interventions in humans create physical or behavioral traits
that may or may not be readily distinguished from what is usually perceived to
be “human”?
o If the blending of nonhuman animal and human DNA results, intentionally or
not, in chimeric entities possessing degrees of intelligence or sentience never
before seen in nonhuman animals, should these entities be given rights and
special protections?
o What unintended personal, social, and cultural consequences could result?
o Will these interventions redefine what it means to be “normal”?
o Who will have access to these technologies, and how will scarce resources be
allocated?

 ARE WE CROSSING SPECIES BOUNDARIES?

o Some individuals have argued that crossing species boundaries is unnatural,
immoral, and in violation of God’s laws
o This argument presumes that species boundaries are fixed and readily
delineated
o A recent issue of the American Journal of Bioethics reflects that the notion of
species boundaries is a hotly debated topic. Some bioethicists have pointed
out there are a variety of species concepts: biological, morphological,
ecological, typological, evolutionary, phylogenetic, to name a few
o All of these definitions of what a species is reflect changing theories and the
varying purposes for which different species are used by individuals

4
GENETIC ENGINEERING
 WILL THE TECHNOLOGY FACILITATE TRANSMISSION OF DISEASE?
o While the issue of the morality of crossing species boundaries reflects differing
world views and may be conceptually unclear, there are known risks associated
with xenotransplantation of transgenic cells or organs from animals to humans
o For example, there is a small but significant risk of the transmission of usually
fatal zoonotic diseases, such as bovine spongiform encephalopathy (also
known as “mad cow disease”), porcine endogenous retroviruses (PERVs), and
Nipah encephalitis
o The introduction of these diseases to the human population could have
devastating consequences. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has banned
xenotransplantation trials using nonhuman primates until the procedure has
been adequately demonstrated to be safe and ethical issues have been
sufficiently publicly discussed

 IS IT ETHICAL TO CREATE ALTERED ANIMALS THAT MAY SUFFER?

o The risks and benefits of the experimental use of animals need to be discussed
as well
o By combining animal DNA and human DNA with plant DNA, do we run the risk
of creating new diseases for which there is no treatment?
o The long-term risks to the environment are unknown. Various bioethicists,
environmentalists, and animal rights activists have argued that it is wrong to
create “monsters” or animals that would suffer as a result of genetic
alternation (for example, a pig with no legs), and that such experimentation
should be banned

 IS IT POSSIBLE THE TECHNOLOGY MAY BE USED TO CREATE SLAVES?

o Several bioethicists have called for a ban on species-altering technology that
would be enforced by an international tribunal—part of the rationale for a ban
is the concern that such technology could be used to create a slave race, that
is, a race of subhumans that would be exploited
o In April 1998, scientists who are opposed to genetically modified organisms,
applied for a patent for a “humanzee,” part human and part chimpanzee, to
fuel debate and to draw attention to potential abuses on this issue. The United
States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) denied the patent.

5
GENETIC ENGINEERING

food security
 FAR FROM STAVING OFF WORLD STARVATION, genetic engineering is set to
o To threaten crop yields
o Force farmers to pay for their rights to fertile seed
o To undercut foreign demand for some third world produce
o To undermine poorer farmers' access to land on which to grow food. Its cruelly
deceptive promise of a technical fix for many people's lack of food not only
conceals the unjust distribution of land and of economic and political power
which underpin world hunger today

 DENYING FOOD TO THE HUNGRY

o The starving are starving because they are denied access to food - not because
there is not enough food

 FEEDING ANIMALS, NOT PEOPLE

o Much of the genetically engineered soya and maize being grown in the United
States will be eaten by animals, not people
o Meat is consumed by people who are already well-fed and who have money to
buy it
o Egypt now grows more food for animals than for people

 ENGINEERING FOR RETAIL CONVENIENCE

o Much of the research has been directed at meeting the commercial wishes of
food processors rather than the nutritional needs of poorer consumers
o The interests of consumers and growers would be better served by giving
them, rather than transnationals, greater control over their food and markets

6
GENETIC ENGINEERING

food chain
 Insect-resistant B.t. expressing crops will reduce the number of pest insects feeding
on these plants, but as there are fewer pests, farmers do not have to apply as much
insecticide, which in turn tends to increase the number of non-pest insects in these
fields
 The safety of GMOs in the food chain has been questioned by some environmental
groups, with concerns such as the possibilities that GMOs could introduce new
allergens into foods, or contribute to the spread of antibiotic resistance
o All studies published to date have shown no adverse health effects resulting
from humans eating genetically modified foods, environmental groups still
discourage consumption in many countries, claiming that GM foods are
unnatural and therefore unsafe
o Such concerns have led to the adoption of laws and regulations that require
safety testing of any new organism produced for human consumption

 GMOs' proponents note that because of the safety testing requirements imposed on
GM foods, the risk of introducing a plant variety with a new allergene or toxin using
genetic modification is much smaller than using traditional breeding processes
o An example of an allergenic plant created using traditional breeding is the kiwi
o One article calculated that the marketing of GM salmon could reduce the cost
of salmon by half, thus increasing salmon consumption and preventing 1,400
deaths from heart attack a year in the United States