SAFETY OF GENETICALLYMODIFIED FOODS

E Jane Morris

Is GM food safe?

All food presents some risk to the consumerAll food presents some risk to the consumer Non-GM risks include:Non-GM risks include:

Food allergensFood allergens Toxic agrochemicals (pesticides etc)Toxic agrochemicals (pesticides etc) Microbial contaminationMicrobial contamination Mycotoxin contaminationMycotoxin contamination Food toxins (lectins, alkaloids etc)Food toxins (lectins, alkaloids etc) BSEBSE

What are the issues for GM food? GM food has been on the market in the US GM food has been on the market in the US

for 10 years with no ill effects reportedfor 10 years with no ill effects reported Risk assessment egRisk assessment eg

Any changes in nutritional compositionAny changes in nutritional composition History of safe use of substances in the GM food History of safe use of substances in the GM food

(toxicity, allergenicity etc)(toxicity, allergenicity etc) StabilityStability Unexpected products (secondary metabolites etc)Unexpected products (secondary metabolites etc)

NB Processed foods are not NB Processed foods are not

themselves GMOsthemselves GMOs

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

Emerging techniques – transcriptome, metabolome and transcriptome analysis to detect any unintended effects

PLANTTISSUE

DNA/mRNAsPROTEINS

COMPONENTSDIFFERENCES

AGRONOMICS

PHENOTYPICS

GENOMICSPROTEOMICS

METABOLOMICS

STATISTICSUnintended effects?

Metabolome expression

Proteomeexpression

Genomeexpression

Function Data

integration

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

Food control is exercised by:

The Department of Agriculture The Department of Health

(enforced by local authorities) The South African Bureau of Standards

Food safety legislation 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)

Should the consumer be told? General information on GM food should be General information on GM food should be

provided in a reasonable and balanced mannerprovided in a reasonable and balanced manner Labelling of individual foods is a complex issue, Labelling of individual foods is a complex issue,

with no general agreement at international levelswith no general agreement at international levels The Codex alimentarius commission of the FAO The Codex alimentarius commission of the FAO

and WHO is attempting to achieve international and WHO is attempting to achieve international agreement on labelling, traceability etcagreement on labelling, traceability etc

Labelling of foods/GMOsProposed 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 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

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

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

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

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

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