SAFETY OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS E Jane Morris

Is GM food safe? All food presents some risk to the consumer All food presents some risk to the consumer Non-GM risks include: Non-GM risks include:  Food allergens  Toxic agrochemicals (pesticides etc)  Microbial contamination  Mycotoxin contamination  Food toxins (lectins, alkaloids etc)  BSE

What are the issues for GM food? GM food has been on the market in the US for 10 years with no ill effects reported GM food has been on the market in the US for 10 years with no ill effects reported Risk assessment eg Risk assessment eg  Any changes in nutritional composition  History of safe use of substances in the GM food (toxicity, allergenicity etc)  Stability  Unexpected products (secondary metabolites etc) NB Processed foods are not NB Processed foods are not themselves GMOs themselves GMOs

Any unintended consequences of genetic modification? EU project looked at GM vs non-GM potato Analyzed Glycoalkaloids Protease inhibitors Vitamin C Fatty acids Amino acids Carbohydrates No negative compositional effects found in any of the GM lines

Emerging techniques – transcriptome, metabolome and transcriptome analysis to detect any unintended effects PLANT TISSUE DNA/mRNAs PROTEINS COMPONENTS DIFFERENCES AGRONOMICS PHENOTYPICS GENOMICS PROTEOMICS METABOLOMICS STATISTICS Unintended effects? Metabolome expression Proteome expression Genome expression Function Data integration

Safety and benefits We subject GM foods to more stringent safety testing than non-GM foods! GM foods hold potential benefit not just risk: Better nutritional quality Reduced risk of poisoning from mycotoxins and agrochemicals Increased food production

Food control is exercised by: The Department of Agriculture The Department of Health (enforced by local authorities) The South African Bureau of Standards

Food safety legislation Department of Agriculture Department of Health South African Bureau of Standards Agricultural Product Standards Act, 1990 (Act 119 of 1990) Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act, 1972 (Act 54 of 1972) Standards Act, 1993 (Act 29 of 1993)

Should the consumer be told? General information on GM food should be provided in a reasonable and balanced manner General information on GM food should be provided in a reasonable and balanced manner Labelling of individual foods is a complex issue, with no general agreement at international levels Labelling of individual foods is a complex issue, with no general agreement at international levels The Codex alimentarius commission of the FAO and WHO is attempting to achieve international agreement on labelling, traceability etc The Codex alimentarius commission of the FAO and WHO is attempting to achieve international agreement on labelling, traceability etc

Labelling of foods/GMOs Proposed labelling in terms of the FCD Act, 1972: Food only Includes live GMOs plus processed (non- live) GMOs Identification in terms of article 18 of the Cartagena Protocol: Not only food - all live GMOs (LMOs). Only live GMOs

Labelling of GM foods in terms of the FCD Act, 1972 Draft regulations published for comment in the Government Gazette of 4 May 2001 Final regulations submitted to DOH Legal Unit during November 2002 Dilemma: -No consensus at the Joint FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission -Health obligation i.r.o. food control is safety + nutrition

Contents of proposed regulations under the FCD Act, 1972 Must indicate presence of allergen (safety) Must indicate different composition, different nutritional value, different method of storage, preparation or cooking (nutrition) May indicate enhanced characteristic (nutrition) or reduced hypersensitivity (safety) subject to validation/certification

Contents of proposed regulations under the FCD Act, 1972 ( continued ) Must indicate presence of genetic material from humans or animals (religion, moral) Must comply with general labelling regulations in terms of the Act

Contents of proposed regulations under the FCD Act, 1972 ( continued ) Included in draft regulations but not in the proposed final regulations: Conditions for claiming “not genetically modified” Prohibition on the claim “GM free” No Identity Preservation System in place Not a health issue No global consensus

Mandatory labelling of all genetically modified foods? Unless identity preservation systems are introduced through the whole food chain, it can be assumed that the majority of foods will have some GM content Identity preservation is expensive for producers/industry and therefore for consumers ($8/tonne for maize?) Analytical methods to test for the presence of GM products are not completely reliable, lack sensitivity and are expensive Cost for Government, and therefore for consumers “Right to know” versus “Right to eat” Not a Health issue

The way forward South Africa should adopt a pragmatic approach South Africa has potential to provide leadership and direction in its approach to GM foods