Genetically-Engineered Foods: Why They Can Be Scary

1. Genetically-Engineered Foods: Why They Can Be Scary Brent McCown Horticulture/Environmental Studies, Director, CIAS UW-Madison (bhmccown@facstaff.wisc.edu)

2. A Translation • Genetic engineering is just one part of biotechnology • Most GMOs are not GEOs! • GEOs discussed here

3. Genetically-Engineered Foods: Why They Can Be Scary • What is genetic engineering? • How extensively is it being used for food crops? • Current public perceptions of genetic engineering? • Why all the fuss? • Future?

4. Genetically-Engineered Food: Public Perceptions • What is genetic engineering? • How extensively is it being used for food crops? • Current public perceptions of genetic engineering? • Why all the fuss? • Future questions?

5. Genetic Engineering (GEO not GMO) • Multi-step step process • Determine needed trait • Get gene (‘genomics’) • Modify gene (‘molecular biology’) • Add other genes • Insert gene (‘transformation’) • Recover engineered organism (‘regeneration’) • Test and market

6. Target Tissue

7. Engineered DNA (Genes)

8. Gene ‘Gun’ (‘Bombardment’)

9. Bombarded Stem

10. Regeneration of Engineered Plant

11. Field Tests

12. Genetically-Engineered Food: Public Perceptions • What is genetic engineering? • How extensively is it being used for food crops? • Current public perceptions of genetic engineering? • Why all the fuss? • Future?

13. Countries Growing G.E. Crops • 16% of field • crop area • worldwide • 30% of US • field crop acreage

14. Total Area of G.E. Crops in the U.S.

15. Use of G.E. for Food Crops (2002) • 25% of U.S. corn crop • Bt-based pest control • 75% of U.S. soybean • Round-up herbicide tolerance • 70% U.S. cotton crop (incl. oil) • Bt-based pest control • 60% Canadian canola (herbicide tolerance) • 50% of papaya • Virus resistance

16. So GEOs Are a Highly Adopted Technology. But………………. • British Medical Association called for a moratorium on G.E. foods • European countries have banned commodity G.E. crops • Gerber and Heinz stopped using G.E. corn and soybeans in baby foods • Gerber owned by Novartis

17. But…………………………. • Iams no longer uses G.E. corn in pet foods • McCain Foods no longer accepts G.E. potatoes for processing • Stopped adoption of G.E. potatoes • U.S. definitions of ‘Organic foods’ ban all G.E. products • ‘Sustainable Agriculture’ proponents shun GEOs.

18. Genetically-Engineered Food: Public Perceptions • What is genetic engineering? • How extensively is it being used for food crops? • Current public perceptions of genetic engineering • Why all the fuss? • Future public attitudes?

19. The World Public and GEO Awareness ‘Have you ever read or heard anything about GM Foods’ -Kamaldeen/Powell, 2000; -Angus Reid World Poll (Angus Reid, 2000)

20. The World Public and GE Food Use ‘See the trend towards GM foods as negative’ -Kamaldeen/Powell, 2000; -Angus Reid World Poll (Angus Reid, 2000)

21. US Public and GEO Food -PEW Initiative report

22. US Public and GEOs -PEW Initiative report; numbers are rank, ’10’ most favorable.

23. Genetically-Engineered Food: Public Perceptions • What is genetic engineering? • How extensively is it being used for food crops? • Current public perceptions of genetic engineering? • Why all the fuss? • Future public attitudes?

24. Why GEOs can scare the public European public concerns about biotechnology (1999) (Percentage who agree with concern) Concerns Supporters Opponents Threatens the 54% 89% natural order………………………………………………... Beneficial but fundamentally 57% 92% unnatural…………………………………………………….. The risks not 34% 80% acceptable…………………………………………………... (Nature Biotech. 18:937)

25. Why does the public think GEOs are scary? SCARY • = 'unnatural'

26. But…not everything is scary! European public attitudes toward biotechnology (1999) Country Genetic Medicine Bio- GM GM food Clone Testing Clean- crops animals up Norway + + + -- -- -- UK ++ ++ ++ - - - Spain/Port ++ ++ ++ ++ + - + Avg. (16) ++ ++ ++ - -- -- + -- ; = strong opposition ++ = Strong support (Nature Biotech. 18:938)

27. Why Is Food G.E. Getting a Negative Reputation? • Information at public level is awful! • The technology is revolutionary • Problems created by industry itself • Real problems exist • Distrust of government monitoring agencies

28. Why Is Food G.E. Getting A Negative Reputation? • Information at public level is awful! • The technology is revolutionary • Mistakes by industry • Public has no ‘buy-in’ • Real problems exist • Distrust of government monitoring agencies

29. A Case Study • Recent issue: • Monarch butterflies and Bt corn

30. Pollen from corn engineered to kill insects (Bt) Coated milkweed leaves Monarch caterpillars Fed on leaves in laboratory 50% died in 4 days The Beginning News release and letter to the editor of Nature

31. Cornell Experiment

32. Final Interpretation ! “KillerCorn”

33. Case Study • What information do you really need? • What is dosage of pollen needed to affect caterpillars? • Is this a real threat in the field?

34. Newer Evidence • 135 to 700 pollen grains/cm2 needed to kill 1/3 of caterpillars in 5 days • Milkweed surrounded by corn has 50 to 75 pollen grains/cm2 on leaves • Milkweeds 30 ft from corn have 1 grain /cm2 on leaves • Conclusion: Not a likely threat to Monarch butterflies

35. Why Is Food G.E. Getting A Negative Reputation? • Information at public level is awful! • The technology is revolutionary • Mistakes by industry • Public has no ‘buy-in’ • Real problems exist • Distrust of government monitoring agencies

36. The Technology Is Revolutionary • Source of genes coding for traits • Can come from any living organism • For crop plants • Bacterial genes most common • Questions that arise • Is this ‘natural’? • What is a vegetarian meal? • Religious connotations

37. Why Is Food G.E. Getting a Negative Reputation? • Information at public level is awful! • The technology is revolutionary • Problems created by industry itself • Real problems exist • Distrust of government monitoring agencies

38. Problems Created by Industry Itself • Have consumers asked for the most commonly engineered traits? • Herbicide tolerance • ‘Pushed on consumers’ • Current traits really not ‘consumer friendly’

39. Problems Created by Industry Itself • Monopolistic character of industry • Few major players • Ownership of technology • Crop diversity issues • Who should own genetic resources?

40. Why Is Food G.E. Getting A Negative Reputation? • Information at public level is awful! • The technology is revolutionary • Mistakes by industry • Public has no ‘buy-in’ • Real problems exist • Distrust of government monitoring agencies

41. Problems With the Technology • Environmental safety • Target pests developing resistance to genes • Overuse of a few genes = overuse of chemicals? • Spread of genes to natural (non-crop) areas • Contamination of non-engineered products • Especially ‘organic’ crops

42. But, the Technology Does Have Incredible Virtues • More efficient use of chemicals • Integrates well with low chemical input strategies • Less use of toxic chemicals • Less impact on beneficial organisms • Unique traits • Can target nutritional/health problems

43. Why Is Food G.E. Getting a Negative Reputation? • Information at public level is awful! • The technology is revolutionary • Mistakes by industry • Public has no ‘buy-in’ • Real problems exist • Distrust of monitoring agencies

44. US Public and Trust for Information Sources on GEOs -PEW Initiative report

45. Genetically-Engineered Food: Public Perceptions • What is genetic engineering? • How extensively is it being used for food crops? • Current public perceptions of genetic engineering? • Why all the fuss? • Future?

46. Medical uses are supported more than agricultural uses Will attitudes eventually merge? Many value-added, consumer-friendly traits are under development Will these be more widely acceptable? Will GEOs ever be viewed as ‘sustainable’? Merge with new trends toward sustainable food systems Public Trends?

47. QUESTIONS? bhmccown@facstaff.wisc.edu