Congress: Gene-altered foods may be put to the test

Fox News 11 mar00

NEW YORK —  Tailor-made corn, artificial tomatoes and other genetically modified foods may be in for some serious scrutiny.

The Food and Drug Administration may soon perform safety reviews on all GM crops, if a pending House bill is passed. Biotech companies would pay a "user fee" to fund the tests. Foods likely to cause allergic reactions would be banned from sale.

Although manufacturers and regulators say genetically engineered foods are safe, opponents say there has not been enough arms-length study of long-term effects and problems with the foods.

"I think it's safe to say in a year's time or less we will have a bill (passed) to address these concerns," Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, D-Ohio, said at a news conference. "Consumer awareness keeps growing."

Kucinich has five co-sponsors for the testing bill as well as the support of the Consumers Union, the Center for Science in the Public Interest and the Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods.

The bill would require that all genetically engineered foods on the market undergo tests within two years, with new foods tested before sale. The FDA would examine foods to find allergies, unintended effects, toxicity, functional characteristics and nutrient levels.

The European Union voted Friday to extend a ban on new GM crops that has been in place for almost two years. And the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced last week that genetically modified foods could not be labeled "organic."

The Next Generation?

With public sentiment turning against genetically modified foods, a group of Australian researchers are searching for the next new thing — speeding up the evolution of crops like corn and rice.

Genetically modified foods are created by cutting and pasting genes between different organisms, like adding a bug-killing bacteria's DNA to corn and soybeans. These crops are increasingly under fire from environmentalists, who charge that they may endanger consumers' health and cause an ecological disaster.

In Australia, they're taking a new approach, using an ingenious new technology in an attempt to assuage the GM critics. Rather than splicing in foreign DNA, the Center for the Application of Molecular Biology to International Agriculture is encouraging plants to mutate and evolve at the speed of light, looking for a strain that would prosper in underdeveloped countries.

"There's the idea that this is less objectionable because you're not putting in foreign DNA, so maybe people will eat the stuff," said Dr. Susan Wessler, a professor of botany and genetics at the University of Georgia. "And maybe it will be considered organic" by the USDA.

On/Off Switches

The DNA of plants like rice and corn are pretty similar. The reason corn is different from rice is that different genes are activated in the two plants. In corn, for example, the genes that make cobs yellow are switched on, for example, while in rice the genes lie dormant.

"A plant may make a particular vitamin in its leaves, but people eat the seed," Wessler explained. "So the idea is, how do you get the vitamin made in the seed?"

CAMBIA is betting that if crops share a common pool of genes, swapping DNA with other organisms is unnecessary — changing an ear of corn is just a matter of turning on the right switch, by sending genetic instructions to the DNA itself.

"It would sit down next to the gene that makes the vitamin in the leaves, and turn it on in the seed," Wessler said. "What you're putting in is not a foreign gene but a switch — like a virus, but safer. The plant isn't making anything it doesn't already have in its DNA."

The Greens React

Despite the fact that CAMBIA is not combining the genetic material of different organisms, environmentalists are still wary and have not given their blessing to the group's techniques.

"These crops might have some of the same risks as other engineered varieties, and may also continue to take the spotlight off more sustainable solutions," said Greenpeace spokesperson Charles Marguilis.

Wessler, who supports traditional genetic modification, predicted CAMBIA's method would not satisfy the demands of anti-GM groups.

"They wouldn't have to look very far to find reasons to object to this technology," she said. Because the scientists would be spurring the plants to mutate, "one can imagine many scenarios that could produce monsters," she said. "That's what the environmental activists may do."