Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T21:06:19.944Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetically modified foods, science, consumers and the media

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2007

I. R. Rowland
I. R. Rowland*
Affiliation:
Northern Ireland Centre for Diet and Health, School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Ulster, Coleraine BT52 1SA, UK
*
Corresponding author: Professor I. R. Rowland, fax +44 2870 32 3023, email [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In contrast to the situation in the USA, where a wide range of genetically modified (GM) foods is available, in Europe very few GM products have been approved for marketing as foods, and there is widespread public concern about their safety and environmental impact. The marketing of a GM crop for food use in Europe falls under the EC novel foods regulations, and applications require the submission of an extensive dossier of information. The safety evaluation of GM foods presents considerable problems both in the conduct and interpretation of experimental studies, because conventional toxicity tests used in the evaluation of simple chemicals may not be appropriate for whole foods. To rationalise the safety evaluation process and to circumvent the difficulties in toxicological assessment of food materials, the concept of substantial equivalence has been developed. The concept is that if it can be demonstrated that the novel food is essentially similar to its conventional counterpart in terms of critical nutritional or anutritional components, then it is likely to be no more or less toxic than the latter. The possible introduction of unintended effects by the genetic modification process is particularly problematic for the safety evaluation process. The new genomic and post-genomic techniques are potentially valuable in the safety evaluation of GM foods, although they are as yet in their infancy.

Keywords

Genetic modificationFood safety evaluation
Type
Meeting Report
Information
Proceedings of the Nutrition Society , Volume 61 , Issue 1 , February 2002 , pp. 25 - 29
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 2002

References

Commission of the European Communities (1997) Commission recommendation of 29 July 1997 concerning the scientific aspects and the presentation of information necessary to support applications for the placing on the market of novel foods and novel food ingredients and the preparation of initial assessment reports under Regulation (EC) No. 258/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council. C(97) 2634 final. Official Journal of the European Communities 40, L253/1–45.Google Scholar
European Commission Scientific Committee on Food (1997). Opinions on the Assessment of Novel Foods Expressed 7 June 1996, 12/13 December 1996. Reports of the Scientific Committee on Food , 40th series, European Commission DGIII/5915/97. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.Google Scholar
European Union (1997) European Union Regulation (EC) no. 258/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 1997 concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients. Official Journal of the European Communities L43.Google Scholar
Ewen, SWB & Pusztai, A (1999) Effect of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing. Galanthus nivalis lectin on rat small intestine. Lancet 354, 1353–1354.Google ScholarPubMed
Food and Agricultural Organization (2000). Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation On Foods Derived From Biotechnology. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
Fuchs, RL & Astwood, JD (1996) Allergenicity assessment of foods derived from genetically modified plants. Food Technology 50, 83–88.Google Scholar
Henderson, M (2001) GM tomato 'reduces risk of disease'. Times 1 May issue, available at http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ 0,,2.122472,00.htmlGoogle Scholar
Kuiper, HA, Kok, EJ & Noteborn, HPJM (2000) Profiling techniques to identify differences between foods derived from biotechnology and their counterparts. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Foods Derived from Biotechnology, pp. 2–12. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, DD, Astwood, JD, Townsend, R, Sampson, HA, Taylor, SL & Fuchs, RL (1996) Assessment of the allergic potential of foods derived from genetically engineered crop plants. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 38, S165–S186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1989). Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes Annual Report 1989 , p. 6. London: MAFF Publications.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1994 a) Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes Annual Report 1994, p. 3. London: MAFF Publications.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1994 b) Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes Annual Report 1994, p. 6. London: MAFF Publications.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1996 a) Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes Annual Report 1996, p. 17. London: MAFF Publications.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1996 b) The Use of Antibiotic Resistance Markers in Genetically Modified Plants for Human Food. Clarification of Principles for Decision-making. London: MAFF Publications.Google Scholar
Muir, S, Collins, GJ, Robinson, S, Hughes, S, Bovy, A, de Vos, CHR, Van Tunen, AJ & Verhhoeyen, ME (2001) Overexpression of petunia chalcone isomerase in tomato results in fruit containing increased levels of flavonols. Nature Biotechnology 19, 470–474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noteborn, HPJM, Lommen, A, Van der Jagt, RCM & Weseman, JM (2000) Chemical fingerprinting for the safety evaluation of unintended metabolic changes in transgenic food crops. Journal of Biotechnology 77, 103–114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (1993). Safety Evaluation of Foods Derived by Modern Technology: Concepts and Principles. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Potrykus, I (2001) Golden rice and beyond. Plant Physiology 125, 1157–1161.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Royal Society (1999) Review of data on possible toxicity of GM potatoes. Statement 9/99 pp. 1–4, available at http://www. royalsoc.ac.uk/files/statfiles/document.29.pdfGoogle Scholar
Van Hal, NLW, Vorst, O, Van Houwelingen, AMML, Kok, EJ, Peijnenburg, A, Aharoni, A, Van Tunen, AJ & Keijer, J (2000) The application of DNA microarrays in gene expression analysis. Journal of Biotechnology 78, 271–280.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
World Health Organization (1995). Application of the Principle of Substantial Equivalence to the Safety Evaluation of Foods or Food Components from Plants Derived by Modern Biotechnology. Geneva: WHO Food Safety Unit.Google Scholar
Ye, XD, Al-Babili, S, Kloti, A, Zhang, J, Lucca, P, Beyer, P & Potrykus, I (2000) Engineering the provitamin A (beta-carotene) biosynthetic pathway into (carotenoid-free) rice endosperm. Science 287, 303–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed