GM OH? A LAY OF THE LAND HEALTH IMPACT WHAT'S NEXT? MARY ANNE SMITH, PHD RD EVIDENCE ANALYST, PRACTICE-BASED EVIDENCE IN NUTRITION ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
GM Oh? A Lay of the Land • Health Impact • What’s Next? Mary Anne Smith, PhD RD Evidence Analyst, Practice-based Evidence in Nutrition
Financial Interest Disclosure
(over the past 24 months)
No relevant financial relationships with any
commercial interests
Terminology • GMOs: “organisms (i.e. plants, animals or microorganism) in which the genetic material (DNA) has been modified in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination” – World Health Organization, 2014 • Synonyms: bioengineering, genetic engineering, gene biotechnology, recombinant DNA technology
Why Bother with GM?
Herbicide Insect Disease Stress
Tolerance Resistance Resistance Resistances
Pollination Product Quality Altered Stacked Traits
Control Yield/Growth
ISAAA. GM Approval Database. 2018
>10 Million Hectares 1 - 5 Million Hectares
15 Foods (182 Events) GM Foods in Canada
Approved to Date Crop Hectrage in Canada, 2016
Alfalfa (3) Grown in 2016 Where in Stores?
Apple (3)
Canola (23) Alfalfa Produce
Cotton (25) Canola Sweet Corn? • Zucchini • Yellow
Flax (1) Corn Squash
Corn (67) Soybean Processed
Canola 4% Foods
Papaya (1) Sugar Beet Oils • Sugars & sweeteners •
Non-GM Crops 94% GM Crops 6% Papaya juices and foods • Soy
Potato (27)
lecithin, beverages, protein
Rice (2) Imported in 2016-17
Salmon powders, puddings, tofu •
Soy 1%
Soy (21) Cottonseed Oil Processed corn foods
Squash (1) Papaya Corn 1%Seafood
Sugar Beet (2) Squash Salmon
Sugar Beet &
Sugar Cane (1) Salmon Meat & Dairy
Alfalfa 0%
Tomato (4) *Indirectly, as GM crops are
often used as animal feed*
CBAN. Where are genetically modified foods? 2018
USDA. GAIN Report. Canada Agricultural Biotechnology Annual 2017. 2017.
ISAAA . Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2016. ISAAA Brief No. 52. 2016
Regulatory Approach: Equivalence • Premise: GM foods not substantially different from non- GM counterpart can be treated the same way • Goal: Determine if the GM food is as safe as its non-GM counterpart • Followed by: Canada, Australia, US and others. Zarrilli. Policy Issues in International Trade and Commodities Study Series No. 29. 2005
Getting to Market
Canada
Approach to risk assessment Substantial equivalence
Pre-market safety assessment
Environmental assessment
Field trials
Animal feeding studies
Post-market monitoring
Waste & contingency plans
Adapted from: PEN®, 2016: Genetically Modified Organisms Background
GM Labelling in Canada
• Voluntary labelling standard adopted in
2004
• Political and public interest in mandating
labelling, but efforts unsuccessful to date
• Bill C-291 – defeated May 2017 at second
reading
• 2018 Canadian survey (n=1046):
• 88.6% agree with mandatory labelling
• 61% disagree that voluntary labelling is
sufficient
USDA GAIN Report, 2017. Canada Agricultural Biotechnology Annual 2017.
Parliament of Canada, undated. Private Member’s Bill C-291. https://www.parl.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&billId=8348744
Charlebois et al., 2018. Biotechnology in food: Canadian attitudes towards genetic engineering in both plant- and animal-based foods. Preliminary results.
Identifying GM/non-GM in Canada
• Labels in accordance with
standard - look for “genetic
engineering” or “not a
product of genetic
engineering” www.nongmoproject.org
• Third-party audits - e.g. Non-
GMO Project
• Certified Organic
www.inspection.gc.caHealth Impact Are GM foods safe?
How could GM foods affect our health?
Toxins
Allergens
Antinutrients
Horizontal Gene
Transfer w/ Gut
Microbiome
PEN® 2016, Genetically Modified Organisms BackgroundDo GM foods contain toxins or
antinutrients?
Zdziarski et al., 2014
• Critical review of toxicity studies (n=21, all 90 days duration)
• Macroscopic and histological examinations of the GI tract
• “All studies examining the GI tract concluded that there were no toxicological or
pathological changes observed that could be related to feeding GM crops to rats”
• BUT, ++ methodological issues
Van Eenennaam & Young, 2014
• Narrative review of animal performance studies
• 15+ years of feeding trials in cattle, pigs, chicken, sheep, fish and others
• Includes long term (2 year) and multiple generation (2-5) studies
• Consistent consensus that the health and performance of GM and non-GM
groups are comparable
Zdziarski et al. Environ Int. 2014;73:423-33
Van Eenennaam & Young. J Am Sci. 2014;92:4255-78.Are there allergens?
• Dunn et al., 2017
?
• Systematic review of 83 studies (34 human, 49 animal), no RCTs
• Studies examined corn (23), wheat (6), rice (12) , soy (14), peanut
(5), milk (1), other foods (16), GM-related products (9)
Q1: Are GM Q2: Is the use of
products more GM products
allergenic than associated with
their conventional the development
counterparts? of allergies?
No ???
Dunn et al. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2017;119:214-22.Is horizontal gene transfer possible?
• Yes, but no evidence yet of natural
occurrence
• Is it because there are natural barriers?
• Dilution of rDNA?
• Timing?
• Inhibitory gut material?
• Or is it a detection issue?
• Evidence from narrative reviews
Nicolia et al. Crit Rev Biotechnol. 2014;34(1):77-88.
Rizzi et al. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2012;52:142-61.How good is the evidence?
• Secondary analyses to date are not
systematic reviews or meta-analyses
• Primary research issues:
1. Volume of studies:
• 1,409 articles on Pubmed since 2014How good is the evidence?
• Secondary analyses to date are not
systematic reviews or meta-analyses
• Primary research issues:
1. Volume of studies:
• 31,848 records before 2006 (Vain et al., 2007)
• 1,409 articles on Pubmed since 2014
2. Reliance on in vitro and animal modelsHow good is the evidence?
• Secondary analyses to date are not
systematic reviews or meta-analyses
• Primary research issues:
1. Volume of studies:
• 31,848 records before 2006 (Vain et al., 2007)
• 1,409 articles on Pubmed since 2014
2. Reliance on in vitro and animal models
3. Study duration – how long is long enough?How good is the evidence?
• Secondary analyses to date are not
systematic reviews or meta-analyses
• Primary research issues:
1. Volume of studies:
• 31,848 records before 2006 (Vain et al., 2007)
• 1,409 articles on Pubmed since 2014
2. Reliance on in vitro and animal models
3. Study duration – how long is long enough?
4. Conflicts of interest ~ 26% of published
primary research (Sanchez, 2015)What’s Next? Four things to look out for
1. Mandatory Labelling?
• In the US, National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Law
passed in 2016
• USDA ‘proposed rule’ open for comments until July 3, 2018
• Ongoing discussions:
• Labelling of highly refined foods
• GM yeast and enzyme
• Thresholds for requiring a label
• Is Canada next?
Agricultural Marketing Service, 2018. https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=AMS_FRDOC_0001-1709
Images from: USDA, National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard. https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/ProposedBioengineeredLabels.pdf2. GM Animals and By-products
• GM Atlantic salmon approved by
Health Canada in 2016
• 4.5 tons entered Canadian market
in spring of 2017
• Currently: eggs produced in
Canada, fish grown in Panama
• Future: entirely produced in
Canada at a new facility in PEI
• First GM animal – are others
next?
CBAN, 2017. Update on the status of GM salmon production in Prince Edward Island, Canada.3. Gene Editing with CRISPR/Cas9
CRISPR guide sequence
• Precise insertion and sequence of novel
DNA – hence, gene editing
DNA memory sequence
• Greatly decreases risk of random
mutations
• Bacterial memory system to
protect from foreign DNA Cas9
• Should these products be tested the
same way as those developed with older
methods?
Thurtle-Schmidt & Lo. Biochem Mol Bio Educ. 2018;42(2):195-205.4. GM Plants as Drug Factories
• “Plant molecular farming” or “pharming” – using GM plants
to create pharmaceutical proteins
• Examples:
• Antibodies for HIV, anthrax
• Vaccines for H5N1, influenza, rabies, rotavirus
• Drugs for Ebola, Fabry disease, Gaucher disease, malaria
Potential for: Challenges:
• Improved speed • Dosing for edible vaccines
• Lower cost • Plant glycosylation
• Improved safety (?) • Purification
• Edible vaccines (?) • Processing
Yao et al. Int J Mol Sci. 2015;16(12):28549-65.
Shen et al. Mol Plant. 2018;11(6):776-88.Everyone is entitled
to his own opinion,
but not his own facts.
- Daniel Patrick MoynihanReferences • World Health Organization. Frequently asked questions on genetically modified foods. May 2014 [cited 2015 Sep 30]. Available from: http://www.who.int/foodsafety/areas_work/food-technology/faq-genetically-modified- food/en/ • U.S. Department of Agriculture. Coexistence factsheets. 2015. Available from: ISAAA. GM Approval Database [cited 2018]. Available from: http://www.isaaa.org/gmapprovaldatabase/default.asp • ISAAA. Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2016. ISAAA Brief No. 52. 2016. Available from: http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/52/download/isaaa-brief-52-2016.pdf • Canadian Biotechnology Action Network. Where are genetically modified foods? 2018. Available from: https://cban.ca/wp-content/uploads/cban-gm-food-chart-poster-2018-copy.jpg • US Department of Agriculture GAIN Report. Canada Agricultural biotechnology annual. 2017. Available from: https://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Agricultural%20Biotechnology%20Annual_Ottawa_Can ada_12-21-2017.pdf • Zarrilli S. International trade in GMOs and GM products: national and multilateral legal frameworks. Policy Issues in International Trade and Commodities Study Series No. 29. 2005. United Nations Publication: Geneva Switzerland. Available from: www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/gmfp/resources/UNITED%20NATIONS%20CONFERENCE%20ON%20TRA DE%20AND%20DEVELOPMENT.en.pdf • PEN®. Genetically Modified Organisms Background. 2016. • Parliament of Canada. Private Member’s Bill C-291. 2016. Available from: https://www.parl.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&billId=8348744 • Charlebois et al. Biotechnology in food: Canadian attitudes towards genetic engineering in both plant- and animal- based foods. Preliminary results. 2018. Available from: https://cdn.dal.ca/content/dam/dalhousie/pdf/management/News/News%20%26%20Events/Dalhousie%20GMO %20Food%20Study%202018%20(EN).pdf • Zdziarski et al. GM crops and the rat digestive tract: a critical review. Environ Int. 2014;73:423-33. Abstract available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25244705
References (cont) • Van Eenennaam & Young. Prevalence and impacts of genetically engineered feedstuffs on livestock populations. J Am Sci. 2014;92(10):4255-78. Abstract available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25184846 • Dunn et al. The allergenicity of genetically modified foods from genetically engineered crops: a narrative and systematic review. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2017;199(3):214-22. Abstract available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28890018 • Nicolia A, Manzo A, Veronesi F, Rosellini D. An overview of the last 10 years of genetically engineered crop safety research. Crit Rev Biotechnol. 2014 Mar;34(1):77-88. Abstract available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24041244 • Rizzi et al. The stability and degradation of dietary DNA in the gastrointestinal tract of mammals: implications for horizontal gene transfer and the biosafety of GMOs. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2012;52(2):142-61. Abstract available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22059960 • Sanchez MA. Conflict of interests and evidence base for GM crops food/feed safety research. Nat Biotechnol. 2015;33(2):135-7. Citation available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25658276 • Agricultural Marketing Service. National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard. 2018. Available from: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=AMS_FRDOC_0001-1709 • Canadian Biotechnology Action Network. Update on the status of GM salmon production in Prince Edward Island, Canada. 2017. Available from: https://cban.ca/wp-content/uploads/GM-Salmon-International-Bulletin-Oct-2017.pdf • Thurtle-Schmidt & Lo. Molecular biology at the cutting edge: a review on CRISPR/CAS9 gene editing for undergraduates. Biochem Mol Biol Educ. 2018;46(2):195-205. Abstract available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29381252 • Yao et al. Plants as factories for human pharmaceuticals: applications and challenges. Int J Mol Sci. 2015;16(12):28549-65. Abstract available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4691069/ • Shen Q et al. The genome of Artemisia annua provides insight into the evoluation of Asteraceae family and artemisinin biosynthesis. Mol Plant. 2018;11(6):776-88. Abstract available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29703587
You can also read
