1. The AgBiotech Controversy Alan McHughen, D.Phil., University of California Riverside, Ca USA alanmc@ucr.edu

2. Are GM foods in US supermarkets? a. Yes b. No

3. Do ordinary tomatoes contain genes? a. Yes b. No

4. Would a tomato with a fish gene taste “fishy”? a. Yes b. No

5. If you ate a GM fruit, might it alter your genes? a. Yes b. No

6. Can animal genes be inserted into a plant? a. Yes b. No

7. Give an example of GM food on the market a. There are none b. All foods are GM c. Tomato d. Wheat e. Squash f. Papaya

8. Survey results (% Correct) Are GM foods in US supermarkets? Are GM foods in US supermarkets? Do ordinary tomatoes contain genes? Do ordinary tomatoes contain genes? Would a tomato with a fish gene taste “fishy”? Would a tomato with a fish gene taste “fishy”? If you ate a GM fruit, might it alter your genes? If you ate a GM fruit, might it alter your genes? Can animal genes be inserted into a plant? Can animal genes be inserted into a plant? Give an example of GM food on the market Give an example of GM food on the market 48 % 40 42 45 30 79% Tomatoes

9. Consequences of poor public understanding of science Public opinion drives policy Public opinion drives policy Ignorance of science results in bad science policy Ignorance of science results in bad science policy Topical political issues demand good science: Topical political issues demand good science: Stem cell research, Nanotechnology, Climate change, GM foods, Pharmaceuticals, Pesticides, Cell phones, Biodiversity, Fuel cell technology, Biological weapons, Evolution in schools, etc. Stem cell research, Nanotechnology, Climate change, GM foods, Pharmaceuticals, Pesticides, Cell phones, Biodiversity, Fuel cell technology, Biological weapons, Evolution in schools, etc.

10. Examples of poor scientific literacy World: Cartagena Protocol 9/11/2003 World: Cartagena Protocol 9/11/2003 “… prevents or reduces the risks (of LMOs) “… prevents or reduces the risks (of LMOs) to biological diversity, taking also into account risks to human health.” Philippines: effect of Bt cornfields Philippines: effect of Bt cornfields Zambia: GM food is ‘poison” Zambia: GM food is ‘poison” Africa (south): cure for HIV/AIDS Africa (south): cure for HIV/AIDS Africa (north): GM foods and CIA Africa (north): GM foods and CIA

11. Need for public science literacy Public perceptions are often based on: Public perceptions are often based on: Invalid assumptions Invalid assumptions Failure to apply critical thinking Failure to apply critical thinking Lack of context (e.g. chemicals). Lack of context (e.g. chemicals).

12. From a billboard in Nebraska, Courtesy of Syngenta Sprayed 32 times Sprayed once.

13. Where do people get information? “GE (rDNA) is unnatural because it breaks the nature’s species barrier that precludes genes moving from one species to another” “GE (rDNA) is unnatural because it breaks the nature’s species barrier that precludes genes moving from one species to another” “DNA is a complex protein” “DNA is a complex protein” “GMOs commercialized with 3 mos to 3 yrs field testing and no long-term safety and environment studies.” “GMOs commercialized with 3 mos to 3 yrs field testing and no long-term safety and environment studies.”

14. A long history of Biotechnology fearmongering

15. What species barrier? Approx 38% of wheat has rye DNA Friebe et al., Crop Science 39:1692-1696 (1999)

16. CHAPTER 10A.15 PROHIBITION ON THE PROPAGATION, CULTIVATION, RAISING AND GROWING OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS IN MENDOCINO COUNTY CHAPTER 10A.15 PROHIBITION ON THE PROPAGATION, CULTIVATION, RAISING AND GROWING OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS IN MENDOCINO COUNTY The people of Mendocino County wish to protect the County’s agriculture, environment, economy, and private property from genetic pollution by genetically modified organisms. (Measure H-2004, passed March 2, 2004.) The people of Mendocino County wish to protect the County’s agriculture, environment, economy, and private property from genetic pollution by genetically modified organisms. (Measure H-2004, passed March 2, 2004.) Sec. 10A.15.030 Definitions. Sec. 10A.15.030 Definitions. (B) “DNA” or “deoxyribonucleic acid” means a complex protein… (B) “DNA” or “deoxyribonucleic acid” means a complex protein…

17. File to support registration of new crop variety- conventional breeding

19. Documented benefits of biotech crops Farmers Farmers Increased yields (especially in developing countries) Increased yields (especially in developing countries) Decreased chemical input costs Decreased chemical input costs Cleaner fields, less dockage Cleaner fields, less dockage Less fuel used Less fuel used Less tillage Less tillage Fewer adverse health effects (esp. China) Fewer adverse health effects (esp. China) Increased income ($44Billion 1996- 2006). Increased income ($44Billion 1996- 2006).

20. Why poorer farmers grow GM crops Philippines (Bt corn) Philippines (Bt corn) ~30% increase in yield ~30% increase in yield South Africa (Bt cotton, Bt maize) South Africa (Bt cotton, Bt maize) ~77% higher returns (smaller farm = higher benefit) ~77% higher returns (smaller farm = higher benefit) China (Bt cotton) China (Bt cotton) 8-10% Higher yields 8-10% Higher yields Reduction in farm labor poisonings Reduction in farm labor poisonings India (Bt cotton) India (Bt cotton) ~70% drop in pesticide exposure ~70% drop in pesticide exposure Shift in pesticide way from older, mote toxic ones Shift in pesticide way from older, mote toxic ones Increased yields Increased yields

21. Regular corn, no pesticide

22. Regular corn plus pesticide

23. GE Bt corn Hybrid ‘D’

24. Documented benefits of biotech crops Consumers Consumers Safer food (less mycotoxin in maize, esp Africa/Asia) Safer food (less mycotoxin in maize, esp Africa/Asia) Safer food (greater regulatory scrutiny) Safer food (greater regulatory scrutiny) Less pesticide Less pesticide Environmental benefits. Environmental benefits.

25. Documented benefits of biotech crops Environment Environment Less pesticide burden Less pesticide burden Safer pesticides Safer pesticides Improved soil from less tillage Improved soil from less tillage Less fuel usage Less fuel usage Increased biodiversity Increased biodiversity Sources: NCFAP, Plant Biotechnology, June 2002; November 2004 Sources: NCFAP, Plant Biotechnology, June 2002; November 2004 Canola Council of Canada, An agronomic and economic assessment of transgenic canola, 2001 Canola Council of Canada, An agronomic and economic assessment of transgenic canola, 2001 Munkvold, G.P., Hellmich, R.L., and Rice, L.G. 1999. Comparison of fumonisin concentrations in kernels of transgenic Bt maize hybrids and non-transgenic hybrids. Plant Dis. 83:130-138. Munkvold, G.P., Hellmich, R.L., and Rice, L.G. 1999. Comparison of fumonisin concentrations in kernels of transgenic Bt maize hybrids and non-transgenic hybrids. Plant Dis. 83:130-138.

26. Biotech opportunities Health and Nutrition Health and Nutrition Removal of allergens Removal of allergens Removal of anti-nutritional substances Removal of anti-nutritional substances Removal of pathogens and contaminants Removal of pathogens and contaminants Mycotoxins in Bt corn Mycotoxins in Bt corn Signal for pathogens (with nanotech) Signal for pathogens (with nanotech) Enhance nutrient content Enhance nutrient content “Golden rice” with β-carotene “Golden rice” with β-carotene India’s “Protato” with increased protein. India’s “Protato” with increased protein.

27. Biotech opportunities Environment Environment Reduced pesticide load Reduced pesticide load More food/feed on less land More food/feed on less land Better resource efficiency Better resource efficiency Water use Water use Climate change adaptations. Climate change adaptations.

28. Biotech opportunities Sustainable development Sustainable development Sustainability in poorer countries Sustainability in poorer countries Philippines Philippines South Africa South Africa Diversification at home and abroad Diversification at home and abroad Specialty crops Specialty crops Improvement of local crops. Improvement of local crops.

29. Controversy remains… Legitimate question: Legitimate question: Is it safe? Is it safe? Safe for environment Safe for environment Safe for food and feed. Safe for food and feed.

33. NAS/IOM findings There are NO documented adverse health effects from eating GE foods. There are NO documented adverse health effects from eating GE foods. Allegations of harm are unfounded Allegations of harm are unfounded Genetic engineering is NOT inherently hazardous. Genetic engineering is NOT inherently hazardous.

34. Paradigm shift: The disconnect Process vs product Process vs product Fear derived from process Fear derived from process Hazard comes from product Hazard comes from product Absolute vs relative Absolute vs relative To some, GE is absolutely novel and incomparable to previous hazards or technologies. To some, GE is absolutely novel and incomparable to previous hazards or technologies. To scientific community, GE is an extension of previous gene manipulation technologies. To scientific community, GE is an extension of previous gene manipulation technologies.

35. Traditional approach to Risk Component Component Risk Assessment Risk Assessment Risk Management Risk Management Risk Communication Risk Communication Responsibility Scientists Regulators No one, everyone, ???

36. Who should be responsible for risk communication? a. Scientists, Academics b. Government c. Industry d. NGOs

37. Modern Approach to Risk Assessment Science driven Science driven Real risk Real risk Substantial equivalence Substantial equivalence Objective Objective Relative Relative “Prove it as safe as…” “Prove it as safe as…” Product Product Values driven Perceived risk Precautionary Principle Subjective Absolute “Prove it safe.” Process

38. Science vs. Non-science Non-scientific approach Non-scientific approach Starts with conclusion, searches for evidence to support it (cherry picking) Starts with conclusion, searches for evidence to support it (cherry picking) Discredits alternative views Discredits alternative views Often lacks context Often lacks context Scientific approach (n.b. not all scientists) Scientific approach (n.b. not all scientists) Collects and analyses all available evidence before (perhaps) reaching conclusion Collects and analyses all available evidence before (perhaps) reaching conclusion Actively seeks alternative interpretations Actively seeks alternative interpretations Is his/her own greatest critic Is his/her own greatest critic Applies Critical thinking skills. Applies Critical thinking skills.

39. Problem of context “Fear uncouples rational and critical thinking” “Fear uncouples rational and critical thinking” E.g. use of pesticides in agriculture E.g. use of pesticides in agriculture “Natural” products are invariably safe. “Natural” products are invariably safe. Synthetic chemicals are invariably hazardous Synthetic chemicals are invariably hazardous Toxicology doesn’t matter: Toxicology doesn’t matter: all chemicals are equally hazardous all chemicals are equally hazardous Amount doesn’t matter: Amount doesn’t matter: any amount is too much. any amount is too much.

40. From a billboard in Nebraska, Courtesy of Syngenta Sprayed 32 times Sprayed once.

41. Fear and loathing: the context of risk Roanoke (Va) Times (9/20/2004): “Mellisa Williamson, 35… worries about the effect on her unborn child from the sound of jackhammers.’ Roanoke (Va) Times (9/20/2004): “Mellisa Williamson, 35… worries about the effect on her unborn child from the sound of jackhammers.’ Is Ms Williamson (or other similarly concerned parents) likely to feed GMO babyfood to her child? Is Ms Williamson (or other similarly concerned parents) likely to feed GMO babyfood to her child?

42. Pregnant Mellisa worries about noise (What’s wrong with this picture?)

43. Scientific fact as common currency Science is a search for TRUTH Science is a search for TRUTH Science evaluates all available evidence before (maybe) reaching a conclusion Science evaluates all available evidence before (maybe) reaching a conclusion Non-science starts with a conclusion, then seeks supporting evidence (and rejects contrary evidence) Non-science starts with a conclusion, then seeks supporting evidence (and rejects contrary evidence) Value neutral Value neutral But access may influence values But access may influence values Facts are not subject to democracy or whim of fashion/popular opinion. Facts are not subject to democracy or whim of fashion/popular opinion. Indiana considered rounding Pi to 3.0 Indiana considered rounding Pi to 3.0 Mendocino County redefined DNA as a protein. Mendocino County redefined DNA as a protein.

44. Science vs Nature Science is the knowledge of Nature Science is the knowledge of Nature Technology might be used to fight Nature Technology might be used to fight Nature Technology might be used to support Nature Technology might be used to support Nature Human blood transfusions Human blood transfusions Air conditioning, irrigation, water purification, etc. Air conditioning, irrigation, water purification, etc. Homo sapiens population >6.5 billion + Homo sapiens population >6.5 billion + Holding capacity of Earth: 3-4 billion humans Holding capacity of Earth: 3-4 billion humans What do we do? What do we do?

45. Should science/technology be used to fight climate change? a. Yes b. No

46. Future Prospect Applications of biotechnology will increase, Applications of biotechnology will increase, Especially in Agriculture Especially in Agriculture Also in Medical, Industrial, etc. Also in Medical, Industrial, etc. Outcome for society at large Outcome for society at large Division between science literate and illiterate? Division between science literate and illiterate? Informed vs ignorant? Informed vs ignorant? The ignorant still get to vote! The ignorant still get to vote!

47. Should people ignorant of issues be allowed to vote? a. Yes b. No

48. Conclusions Biotechnology is a tool with no greater potential risks than other breeding methods Biotechnology is a tool with no greater potential risks than other breeding methods But does provide opportunities for good But does provide opportunities for good Each application of Biotechnology must be individually and properly evaluated Each application of Biotechnology must be individually and properly evaluated Biotechnology may serve objectives of environmental, agronomic, and economic sustainability Biotechnology may serve objectives of environmental, agronomic, and economic sustainability Biotechnology is not a panacea but also cannot be categorically rejected or ignored. Biotechnology is not a panacea but also cannot be categorically rejected or ignored.

49. Conclusion Scientists provide information Scientists provide information And context (e.g., that nature also transfers genes) And context (e.g., that nature also transfers genes) Society, not scientists, makes decisions Society, not scientists, makes decisions But must have accurate information But must have accurate information Scientists have professional responsibilities Scientists have professional responsibilities To conduct work in an ethically sound manner To conduct work in an ethically sound manner To inform, but not advocate, policy. To inform, but not advocate, policy.