 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 15 - 21 April 1999 Issue No. 425 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
 |
 |
|
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 15 - 21 April 1999 Issue No. 425
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
|
|
|
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Profile Features Travel Living Sports People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters Beyond the last barrier
By Gihan ShahineContemplate the menu of the future: potatoes with chicken and insect genes; fish and meat with human genes; bread made of corn with firefly genes; and cantaloupe and squash containing genes from bacteria and viruses.
These are just a few of the food products biotechnologists are busy developing all over the world, and especially in the US, using genetic engineering to break down the basic genetic barriers between species and also between humans, animals and plants. This biotechnology alters or modifies the genetic make-up of organisms by transferring genes from unrelated and dissimilar species -- for instance, from animals to plants. In some cases, chemical additives manufactured by genetically engineered bacteria are also called genetically engineered foods. For example, rennin, an enzyme used in cheese manufacturing, is extracted from bacteria engineered with a copy of a cow gene.
Currently, the major application of genetic engineering to agriculture is in transgenic crops. A wide variety of genetically engineered crop plants are now under development, and some crops have reached the marketplace.
Genetically modified (GM) crops currently on the world market include tomatoes altered with a synthetic gene that retards softening; potatoes and corn modified with bacterial genes for insecticidal toxins; soybeans (which are used in 60 per cent of all processed foods, such as bread, pasta, sweets, ice cream, pies, biscuits, margarine, meat products and vegetarian meat substitutes) and cotton (some grown for cottonseed oil) with bacterial genes that allow the crops to endure applications of chemical weed-killers; and squash with viral genes that provide disease resistance. Although their development has not progressed as far, livestock and fish are also being genetically engineered. Genetically modified organisms are also used to produce cheeses and oil. But this is just the beginning. Many scientists actually expect that, in a few years, natural foods are likely to disappear.
Under the present international regulations, most genetically modified foods are not required to be labelled. In an article titled "Genetically Engineered Food -- a Serious Risk", award-winning geneticist John B Fagan writes that manufacturers are already introducing genetically modified ingredients into many processed foods without informing consumers: in other words, writes Fagan, "governments are ignoring the wishes of the public". A recent survey found that 85-90 per cent of US consumers want clear labelling of all genetically engineered foods, according to the same source.
Are mutant cantaloupes the entrée of the future? Food for thought on the way to market photo: Sherif Sonbol
In Egypt, however, officials at the ministries of health and agriculture assure they have been taking a cautious attitude towards the recent wave of genetically modified products. "The safe application of biotechnology to problems of agricultural productivity requires an appropriate biosafety system that encompasses both policy and regulations," notes Magdi Madkour, director of the Agricultural Genetic Engineering Research Institute (AGERI). He explains that the use of new technologies have raised a number of regulatory issues related to risk/benefit analysis, associated with genetic diversity, the environment, and human and animal health. "Currently, most developing countries do not have guidelines or regulations for biotechnology products, which may turn them into a potential testing ground for materials deemed too risky to test in a developed country. Meanwhile, developing countries seeking to use the new technology to address limitations in food and fibre production are being pressured from within as well as outside forces to formulate biosafety systems," Madkour says.
In 1995, the Ministry of Agriculture therefore issued a decree to establish a national biosafety system, founding the national biosafety committee (NBC) and a number of institutional biosafety committees (IBCs). The NBC brings together a number of researchers in agriculture, health, environment, industry, education, and policy, and is chaired by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Agriculture Youssef Wali.
"The NBC acts as the official body responsible for ensuring that biotechnology continues to be safe, facilitating access to modern biotechnology generated abroad," says Madkour, who is also a member of the committee. It formulates, implements, and updates safety codes, assesses the biotechnology risks, issues licences for biotech products, provides training and technical advice, reports annually to government authorities and coordinates with national and international organisations.
One member of the NBC board is a principal investigator: he or she receives requests for permits for the release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), inspects facilities, submits a report to the NBC upon which a permit is issued or denied, and advises staff on safe practices and techniques.
IBCs, on the other hand, are to be established in each facility involved in genetic engineering work. Their role is to inspect and work in those facilities, enforce approved policies and regulations, ensure that all standards are rigorously followed, check and advise on biosafety issues on a day-to-day basis, follow up data on all aspects of biosafety related to mandated crops, monitor worldwide biosafety requirements in biotechnology, and report annually to the NBC.
"This national biosafety system will enable Egypt to use and manage biotechnology and genetic engineering in an environmentally safe way," Madkour predicts.
But have genetically engineered crops reached the Egyptian public's plates? A researcher at the National Research Centre (NRC), who preferred not to be named, told Al-Ahram Weekly that the application of biotechnology in Egypt has not gone beyond very limited tests and research work of traditional biotech processes conducted in labs, hothouses and very small farms. "That is, we don't produce GM crops for marketing purposes," she asserts. Egypt, in other words, still depends on scientific investigations conducted abroad. What should be of concern, however, is whether to allow, regulate or totally ban the import of biotech products, the researcher warns.
Since GM crops are likely to flood the international market very soon, many scientists expect that Egypt will have to regulate the import of such products. "All shipments of biotech products should at least be accompanied by a detailed label with all the genes used in the modification process," the researcher notes. "The safety assessment should also depend on scientific rather than commercial basis. And of course, it is the media's role to increase public awareness of the potential hazards of such products."
In 1997, Minister of Health Dr Ismail Sallam imposed a ban on the import of genetically engineered cereals. The decree stipulated that all shipments of cereals or dry legumes must be accompanied by a certificate assuring that no transgenic process had been used in the cultivation of the crop. The decree was a health precaution, the minister was reported as saying, issued because of the possibility that genetically engineered agricultural products could be dangerous to the health. It was designed to "play it safe and ban transgenic foodstuffs until international health organisations offer a definitive answer", officials said at the time.
Sallam's decision seemed to target imports of US corn, wheat and soybeans, which were reported to be largely produced by genetic engineering. According to 1996-7 figures, Egypt is second only to Japan as an importer of US wheat, purchasing 2.9 million tonnes of crop during that year. In 1996, Egypt ranked sixth in corn imports, buying roughly 2.3 million tonnes of the crop in 1996 alone.
The Health Ministry revoked the ban only a few weeks after it was issued, however. Officials stated that "the initial ban was merely intended as a precautionary measure for public health reasons" and that "the ministry's decree was not intended to ban US imports of biotech products, merely to regulate them."
The US secretary of agriculture was then quoted by Reuters as saying that "Egypt has finally agreed that US imports which are not produced by genetic engineering, or those that are genetically modified, but are normally used in the producing country, should not be accompanied by a certificate."
Zeinab Abdel-Halim, head of the Ministry of Health's Nutrition Department, explained in an article recently published in Al-Ahram Weekly that all imports are usually accompanied by documents stating whether the product is used in its country of origin. If the producing country, she added, uses the genetically engineered crop, that is adequate proof that it is perfectly safe. "In case of any doubt, we should send the product to a specialised lab for analysis," she said.
Today, however, Fahmi Seddiq, professor of hygiene at the Institute of Nutrition, and member of the NBC and the Health Ministry's Higher Committee of Food Safety (HCFS), insists that, officially, all shipments of cereals should be accompanied by a certificate stating that no transgenic process was used in their production. But there are public doubts regarding the enforcement of official regulations and the reliability of certificates. Seddiq concedes that the HCFS will soon have to study the application of a more reliable system to ensure licence credibility.
"I, for one, and most of the Health Ministry officials are against the entry of any transgenic crops into the country," Seddiq maintained. "GM foods may very well be health hazards and we are not willing to take the risk." Many officials also maintain that the Ministry of Health is heading toward the imposition of further restrictions on GM imports, and that a total ban may be enforced stringently -- if local production of crops, especially wheat, corn and soybeans is sufficient.
Taymour Nasreddin, deputy chairman of AGERI, was quoted by Al-Ahram Al-Arabi as affirming that there are no transgenic crops on the Egyptian market. He added that Egypt previously refused to accept the import of US anti-worm cotton seeds, which are very different from their Egyptian counterparts, but conceded that the NBC has very recently approved the entry of shipments of genetically modified corn from the US.
Internationally, GM foodstuffs are a burning political and economic issue. Many environmentalists all over the world, and especially in the UK, are demanding that GM products be handled, stored and sold separately from their naturally grown counterparts. US Department of Agriculture officials, however, steadfastly argue that GM crops are not harmful to health, and that banning or even labelling them would effectively discriminate against or exclude certain products from the international market.
Meanwhile, several protests against genetically modified crops have erupted throughout Europe in the past few months, with lobbyists arguing that commercial and political motives have taken precedence over possible health concerns, with little regard for the threat GM foods could represent. Greenpeace International, the powerful environmental lobby, was recently quoted by Reuters as stating that "the United States seems to take the position that every state in the world has to accept their estimation that genetically manipulated crops are safe and acceptable".
Similarly, a Washington-based non-profit organisation has launched an international boycott of GM foods. The "Pure Food Campaign" is working against the production and distribution of GM foods through a programme of public education and consumer activism.
Many consumers are reported to be supporting the boycott. According to a US public opinion survey, 53 per cent of the public feel that it is morally wrong to genetically engineer animals. Seventy per cent believe that using biotechnology to introduce animal genes into plants is unacceptable, and nearly 90 per cent found it unacceptable to place human genes in animals. A vast majority of 85 per cent felt it would be very important to label foods that have been genetically engineered -- so they could avoid purchasing them.
Many biotechnologists, however, argue that genetic engineering is essential to increase food production in order to satisfy the needs of growing populations, especially in the Third World. They maintain that genetic engineering is instrumental to addressing agricultural problems, extending products' shelf life, allowing easier shipping, enabling crops to better withstand poisonous weed-killing herbicides, reducing the amount of water used in irrigation and inducing vaccines in crops to cure certain diseases and epidemics.
But can humans tamper with nature and still play it safe? The answer remains highly contested. In February, 20 scientists from 13 countries issued a memorandum supporting their colleague Dr Arpad Puszatai's research into the possible harmful effects of genetically modified food. Dr Puszatai has written three books and published 270 research papers on the subject. His research has "involved feeding GM potatoes to rats and looking for the changes in their physiology, particularly the gut, metabolic process and immune system." The research revealed that the size of several organs, including the brain, decreased, and that their immune system was weakened after the feeding trials. Puszatai has been quoted as saying that he "would not eat GM food" and that "it is very, very unfair to use our fellow citizens as guinea pigs".
Many scientists are also concerned about the potential health hazard of consuming genetic material that is resistant to common antibiotics. Creating a new strain of antibiotics is a very difficult job. There are also fears that biotechnology could result in the development of new weeds, leading to increased contamination of the water and food supply due to farmers' increasing use of toxic herbicides. The spread of diseases across species barriers, loss of bio-diversity in crops, the disturbance of the ecological balance, the introduction of new toxins and allergens in foods: all are potential side-effects of genetic engineering.
Erwin Chargaff, the eminent biochemist who is often referred to as the father of modern molecular biology, has always warned that the technology of genetic engineering poses a greater threat to the world than the advent of nuclear technology. Many scientists also warn that such dangers, if incurred, will be irreversible.
Should we try to feed the world's growing population without subjecting it to risks posed by genetic engineering? This is a question yet to be answered. In the meantime, however, watch your plate.
