1 / 16

SAFETY OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS

SAFETY OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS. E Jane Morris. Is GM food safe?. All food presents some risk to the consumer Non-GM risks include: Food allergens Toxic agrochemicals (pesticides etc) Microbial contamination Mycotoxin contamination Food toxins (lectins, alkaloids etc) BSE.

durin
Download Presentation

SAFETY OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. SAFETY OF GENETICALLYMODIFIED FOODS E Jane Morris

  2. Is GM food safe? • All food presents some risk to the consumer • Non-GM risks include: • Food allergens • Toxic agrochemicals (pesticides etc) • Microbial contamination • Mycotoxin contamination • Food toxins (lectins, alkaloids etc) • BSE

  3. What are the issues for GM food? • GM food has been on the market in the US for 10 years with no ill effects reported • Risk assessment eg • Any changes in nutritional composition • History of safe use of substances in the GM food (toxicity, allergenicity etc) • Stability • Unexpected products (secondary metabolites etc) • NB Processed foods are not themselves GMOs

  4. Any unintended consequences of genetic modification?EU project looked at GM vs non-GM potato • Analyzed • Glycoalkaloids • Protease inhibitors • Vitamin C • Fatty acids • Amino acids • Carbohydrates • No negative compositional effects found in any of the GM lines

  5. Emerging techniques – transcriptome, metabolome and transcriptome analysis to detect any unintended effects AGRONOMICS PHENOTYPICS GENOMICS PROTEOMICS METABOLOMICS STATISTICS Genome expression Unintended effects? Function Metabolome expression Proteome expression Data integration DIFFERENCES COMPONENTS PROTEINS DNA/mRNAs TISSUE PLANT

  6. Safety and benefits • We subject GM foods to more stringent safety testing than non-GM foods! • GM foods hold potential benefit not just risk: • Better nutritional quality • Reduced risk of poisoning from mycotoxins and agrochemicals • Increased food production

  7. Food control is exercised by: • The Department of Agriculture • The Department of Health (enforced by local authorities) • The South African Bureau of Standards

  8. Department of Agriculture Department of Health South African Bureau of Standards Agricultural Product Standards Act, 1990 (Act 119 of 1990) Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act 54 of 1972) Standards Act, 1993 (Act 29 of 1993) Food safety legislation

  9. Should the consumer be told? • General information on GM food should be provided in a reasonable and balanced manner • Labelling of individual foods is a complex issue, with no general agreement at international levels • The Codex alimentarius commission of the FAO and WHO is attempting to achieve international agreement on labelling, traceability etc

  10. Proposed labelling in terms of the FCD Act, 1972: Food only Includes live GMOs plus processed (non-live) GMOs Identification in terms of article 18 of the Cartagena Protocol: Not only food - all live GMOs (LMOs). Only live GMOs Labelling of foods/GMOs

  11. Labelling of GM foods in terms of the FCD Act, 1972 • Draft regulations published for comment in the Government Gazette of 4 May 2001 • Final regulations submitted to DOH Legal Unit during November 2002 • Dilemma: - No consensus at the Joint FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission - Health obligation i.r.o. food control is safety + nutrition

  12. Contents of proposed regulations under the FCD Act, 1972 • Must indicate presence of allergen (safety) • Must indicate different composition, different nutritional value, different method of storage, preparation or cooking (nutrition) • May indicate enhanced characteristic (nutrition) or reduced hypersensitivity (safety) subject to validation/certification

  13. Contents of proposed regulations under the FCD Act, 1972 (continued) • Must indicate presence of genetic material from humans or animals (religion, moral) • Must comply with general labelling regulations in terms of the Act

  14. Contents of proposed regulations under the FCD Act, 1972 (continued) Included in draft regulations but not in the proposed final regulations: • Conditions for claiming “not genetically modified” • Prohibition on the claim “GM free” No Identity Preservation System in place Not a health issue No global consensus

  15. Mandatory labelling of all genetically modified foods? • Unless identity preservation systems are introduced through the whole food chain, it can be assumed that the majority of foods will have some GM content • Identity preservation is expensive for producers/industry and therefore for consumers ($8/tonne for maize?) • Analytical methods to test for the presence of GM products are not completely reliable, lack sensitivity and are expensive • Cost for Government, and therefore for consumers • “Right to know” versus “Right to eat” • Not a Health issue

  16. The way forward • South Africa should adopt a pragmatic approach • South Africa has potential to provide leadership and direction in its approach to GM foods

More Related