Frequently Asked Questions |
 |
|
Learn more about plant biotechnology with this freshly
updated Q & A.
|
What is biotechnology?
Plant
biotechnology describes a process in which genetic information and
techniques, including genetic engineering, are used to develop useful and
beneficial plants. Conventional techniques, such as selective breeding, have
been used for centuries to improve the food we grow and eat. Modern plant biotechnology
is a new tool that allows researchers to do the same thing with greater ease
and precision.
How does plant biotechnology work?
Every living thing, from the most simple to the most
sophisticated, carries a genetic code, or "blueprint," that determines
precisely what traits it will have. Genes carry the code that tell a plant what
color it will be or how it will taste.1
Biotechnology allows scientists to identify beneficial traits
(see slide 10) in one plant — qualities like added nutrition, increased flavor
or greater ability to fight pests or diseases — and incorporate them into
another.
Is it natural to move a gene from one plant to
another?
The transfer of genes
between plants is normal and occurs naturally all the time — usually with the
help of wind or insects. Gene
flow typically occurs between sexually compatible plants that are flowering
at the same time and are close together.
What about transferring a gene from one plant
species to another? Is this OK?
Different plants share many of the same genes,
which are the basic building blocks of life. For example, when researchers
unlocked the secrets of the rice genome in 2002,
they discovered a nearly perfect, yet smaller, model for several other cereal
grains — namely barley, corn, oats, rye and wheat. These plants all
evolved from one cereal plant about 70 million years ago. So even though these
grains outwardly appear different, their genetic makeup on the inside is very
similar. The same gene that allows a certain variety of rice to resist drought,
for example, could be transferred to wheat so it, too, could be made
drought-resistant.
Is it right for people to "toy" with Mother
Nature in this way?
"It is important to recognize that we have been genetically
modifying the food supply for thousands of years,"
says former University of Minnesota professor Susan Harlander. 2
Teosinte
(see slide eight), the ancient ancestor of corn, for example, bears little
resemblance to the modern varieties of corn we enjoy today. The same is true
with tomatoes, whose ancestor was just a fraction of the size and widely
considered poisonous.
If people have been modifying food for years,
why do some people object to biotechnology?
A lot of concern you hear about biotechnology
has been focused in Europe, which has been beset by a number of food scares in
recent years. 3 But in the
United States, biotechnology is not a top of mind issue with most people. It's
best to look at plant biotechnology along a continuum — as the next step in the
refinement of genetic enhancement techniques that began thousands of years ago
with the domestication of wild plants for food production. That's the position
of the National Research Council. In a 1989 report, it said "no conceptual
distinction exists between genetic modification of plants and microorganisms by
classical methods or by molecular techniques that modify DNA and transfer genes.
. ."
Are foods developed with biotechnology in
supermarkets now?
Yes. In the United States, it's estimated that
70 percent or more of the food contains at least some ingredients developed
with biotechnology. A soft drink that is sweetened with fructose — which is
made from corn — would be on the list, for example, as would all kinds of
products, including some candies, that contain soybean oil.
How many different biotech crops have been approved for
use in the United States?
Seventy-three varieties of biotech crops are
approved for human or animal consumption in North America: 56 different types
in the United States, 54 in Canada (including those developed with mutagenesis)
and three in Mexico. The most prevalent crops are soybeans , cotton, corn and
canola. Biotech papayas
and squash are also available. Biotech flax, potatoes, sugar beets, sweet corn, tomatoes and
rice have been approved by regulators but, for the most part, have not been
widely adopted by farmers.
How long
have biotech foods been on the market in the United States?
In 1994, the FlavrSavr®
tomato became the first biotech food product on the market. This tomato was
developed to taste better and to have a longer shelf life. In 1995-96, products
such as biotech cotton first became available to farmers.
Have farmers embraced biotech crops?
Yes. Biotechnology is
considered by several people to be the most rapidly adopted technology
in the history of agriculture. Globally, the amount of land planted with
biotech crops increased by 12 percent in 2002 — the sixth straight year that global farmers have
adopted biotech crops at a double-digit pace, according to the International
Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA). In the United
States in 2002, 75 percent of the soybean acres, 71 percent of the cotton acres
and 34 percent of the corn acres were planted with biotech varieties. In 2003 in the United States,
it's expected that 80 percent of soybean acres, 38 percent of corn acres and
and about 70 percent of cotton acres will be planted with biotech varieties, according
to the USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service. 4
Why are biotech crops so popular with farmers?
Farmers are
able to make more money
by planting biotech crops while at the same time helping to preserve the environment.
Between 1998 and 2001, global cotton farmers reaped an
additional $1.7 billion in income by using Bt cotton, according to a
December 2002 report from the ISAAA.5
Yield increases for Bt cotton ranged from 5 to 10 percent in China, 10
percent or more in the United States and Mexico, and 25 percent in South
Africa. A separate study
showed that six biotech crops planted in the United States — soybeans,
corn, cotton, papaya, squash and canola — produced an additional 4 billion
pounds of food and fiber on the same acreage, improved farm income by $1.5
billion and reduced pesticide use by 46 million pounds. Another study showed that
environmentally friendly no-till conservation practices increased 35 percent
since no-till biotech products came on the market. That means farmers spend
less time plowing and save money on fuel while at the
same time improving water and soil quality — not to mention improving wildlife
habitat.
Are these products safe for me and my family?
Yes. Biotech foods on the market today are as safe as those developed
through conventional breeding.6
Since the first biotech food product came on the market in 1994, there hasn't
been a single documented case of an illness caused by biotech foods.7
Hundreds of studies have confirmed the safety of biotech crops and food,
including a 15-year study by the European Commission that involved more than
400 research teams. Scientific organizations and regulatory agencies around the
world have declared their confidence in the safety of biotech foods, including
the World Health Organization (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD), the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the Royal Society of London, as
well as national academies in China, Brazil, India and Mexico and international
scientific groups. Additionally, more than 3,300 scientists, including three
Nobel Prize winners, have signed a statement in support of biotechnology. The General Accounting Office,
the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress, also said biotech foods are "as
safe as conventional foods."
Can a biotech food contain a gene to which I'm allergic?
Assuring
that biotech foods don't cause allergies is an important part of the regulatory
approval process. About 90 percent of food allergies are caused by a handful
of foods.8
So the potential for causing allergies can be easily reduced by not using
genetic material from these foods. In addition, any genetic material that is
used is carefully studied to see if it has anything in common with known
allergens. Then, once it's inserted into a plant, the plant is studied to see
if new allergens are created. Rather than causing allergies, many people are
looking to plant biotechnology as a new tool to remove allergens from
food.9
Who ensures the safety of biotech foods?
In the United States, the safety of biotech food
is overseen by three separate agencies:
- The Food and Drug Association (FDA) assesses the safety of
all foods and animal feeds, including those produced through plant
biotechnology.
- The Department of Agriculture (USDA), through its Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service, oversees field testing of biotech seeds and
plants to make sure their release causes no harm to the environment, especially
native plants.10
- The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) evaluates biotech
plants' environmental safety such as their pesticide properties, possible
effect on wildlife and how these plants break down in the environment. The
agency also must approve any herbicide use with herbicide-tolerant crops.11
Before foods developed with biotechnology are brought to the
marketplace in the United States, there are nine separate steps in the
regulatory process that typically take seven to 10 years to complete — a far
more rigorous process than is required for conventional foods, says Bruce
Chassy, a professor of food microbiology at the University of Illinois. "Crops
produced through biotechnology have proven to be as safe or safer than crops
produced by conventional breeding," he says. 12
Academics, third-party scientists, consumers, growers and the public at large
all have multiple opportunities to participate.
What organizations have expressed support for biotechnology?
Several leading health organizations have voiced support for
biotechnology, including:
- The American
Medical Association, which recognized the "many potential benefits offered
by genetically modified crops and foods . . . and encourages ongoing research
in food biotechnology." 13
- The American Dietetic Association, which said "biotechnology techniques have the potential to be
useful in enhancing the quality, nutritional value, and variety of food
available for human consumption and in increasing the efficiency of food
production, food processing, food distribution, and waste management." 14
- The Institute of Food Technologists, which said plant
biotechnology "offers the potential to rapidly and precisely improve the
quantity and quality of food available," and added that the precision of
biotechnology will lead to "more predictability and an easier safety assessment
process."15
- And the World Health Organization, which stated that "the
benefits of biotechnology are many," including improved production and reduced
pesticide use, and promise "major improvements in both food quality and
nutrition." 16
- The American
College of Nutrition "supports the use of biotechnology to
develop food crops that contribute to global food security and enhance the
safety and nutritional value of the food supply." 17
Are biotech foods or ingredients
labeled?
A few countries, such as Japan and
members of the European Union, have special labeling policies in place. In the
United States, the Food and Drug Administration requires labeling only if a
biotech food is "significantly different" from its conventional counterpart,
that is if there's a change in its nutritional content or contains an
introduced allergen, meaning that it can have a health effect. If the products
are "substantially equivalent," a label isn't required. The theory behind this
approach is that a label should not be based on the process to grow a
crop and should instead be focused on food's nutritional content. The American
Medical Association has concurred, saying "there is no scientific justification
for special labeling of genetically modified foods, as a class." 18
If a biotech food, however, is "significantly different" from its traditional
counterpart — such as an orange with higher-than-normal levels of vitamin C — a
label would be required, under current law.
What about consumers' right to know?
Consumers need relevant and meaningful safety and
nutritional information to make sound food safety decisions. Today's foods
produced using biotechnology are tested and reviewed repeatedly by researchers
to make sure they are safe, free of allergens and the same as their
conventional counterparts. As a result, there's no need for special labeling.
If the food product is changed in some material way nutritionally or that may
affect health, then labels should be required.
What is the environmental impact of biotechnology?
Several studies have confirmed the environmental benefits
of biotech crops. The benefits range from improved
habitat for birds such as pheasants and bobwhite quail to cleaner drinking
water and a reduction in harmful greenhouse gases and fuel use. One study showed that
environmentally friendly no-till conservation practices increased 35 percent
since biotech seeds came on the market in 1996, while another study showed how
biotech crops reduced pesticide use by 46 million pounds in one year.
What about the study that reportedly showed that Bt corn kills monarch butterflies?
A widely publicized Cornell University laboratory study
examined what happened when monarch butterfly larvae
were force fed milkweed covered with large amounts Bt corn pollen. Although
the lead researcher cautioned against drawing any conclusions about the risk to
monarch butterflies in the field, 19
many people did anyway. Since then, several studies — including one conducted
by a team of scientists that is considered a model for assessing the risk
of biotech products — have found the risk of Bt corn on monarchs to be
"negligible." 20 The erosion
of habitat in Mexico where monarchs spend the winter is considered one of the
greatest threat to butterflies. A draft study posted in February 2002 to the University of
Kansas' Monarch Watch Web site said an unusual cold snap in Mexico killed an
estimated 74 percent and 81 percent of the butterflies at the two major
butterfly wintering sites. 21
What about
biotech crops leading to the creation of "superweeds" and other new
environmental risks with this new technology?
The transfer of genes
between plants is normal and occurs naturally all the time — usually with the
help of wind or insects. Gene
flow typically occurs between sexually compatible plants that are flowering
at the same time and are close together. Genes from a biotech crop
technically could spread to wild relatives, but the chances that these plants
would be transformed into a "superweed" are slim — for the same reason a
domesticated canary has little chance of surviving in the wild.
Herbicide-resistant weeds, for example, are a minor nuisance to farmers, but
have no advantage in their own natural ecosystem. 22
A recent study concluded that biotech plants themselves are unlikely to survive
long in the wild.23 In addition, there must be wild
relatives nearby capable of reproducing with the cultivated crop. Since there
are no wild relatives of soybeans or corn in the United States, for example,
the chance of creating a superweed is zero.24
Other crops such as canola, which has wild varieties, require extra precautions
such as planting a border barrier around biotech crops to absorb the flow of
pollen.
What about the unknown, potential long-term risks of biotechnology?
Biotechnology may seem like a new technology, but it has
been under development and tested for 20 years. There's no scientific evidence
showing that biotech foods are any less safe than conventional foods. In fact,
biotech foods undergo more extensive testing than their traditional
counterparts. More than 25,000 field trials have been conducted on more than 60
crops in 45 countries, and scientists have detected no long-term effects on
consumers, animals or the environment.25
"Many consumers in North America, Europe and China have been eating GM
(genetically modified) food for several years, without any demonstrated adverse
effects on human health," said Ismail Serageldin and Gabrielle Persley, of the
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research. Per Pinstrup-Andersen
of the International Food Policy Research Institute summed up the issue well.
He said, "Condemning biotechnology for its potential risks without considering
the alternative risks of prolonging the human misery caused by hunger, malnutrition
and child death is as unwise and unethical as blindly pursuing this technology
without the necessary biosafety."26
For more information:
Frequently
Asked Questions — U.S. Department of Agriculture
Agricultural
Biotechnology: Informing the Dialogue — Cornell University
Agriculture
Biotechnology: Will it Help? — Food and Agriculture Organization
Explore
the Benefits of Biotechnology — Council for Biotechnology Information
| 
