Scientists renew call for light-touch legislation on second-generation GM crops
Steve Connor is the Science Editor of The Independent and i. He has won many awards for his journalism, including five-times winner of the prestigious British science writers’ award; the David Perlman Award of the American Geophysical Union; four times highly commended as specialist journalist of the year in the UK Press Awards; UK health journalist of the year and a special merit award of the European School of Oncology for his investigations into the tobacco industry. He has a degree in zoology from the University of Oxford and has a special interest in genetics and medical science, human evolution and origins, climate change and the environment.
Monday 21 July 2014
Senior scientists have called for a revamp of European legislation covering genetically modified crops in the light of radical advances in genome editing that has enabled crop researchers to make the smallest changes to a plant’s DNA with pinpoint accuracy.
Europe’s regulations governing the introduction of new GM crops is based on the actual DNA process used to generate the genetic modifications, rather than the end product of the process, which is why it now needs reforming the researchers said.
They believe that current legislation on GM crops is inconsistent, given that it is possible to produce mutations in plants that are identical to those made by conventional plant breeders, but with greater accuracy and speed.
Professor Ottoline Leyser, director of the Sainsbury Laboratory at Cambridge University, said that gross genetic changes brought about by conventional crop breeding involving the random generation of mutations is not subjected to the tough regulatory process, whereas those produced through GM have to conform to the rules.
“I’m not arguing for less legislation, I’m arguing for more legislation. I would like a sensible, proportionate, evidence-based system for everything,” Professor Leyser said.
There is now even some doubt as to whether genetic mutations in crops by the genome-editing technique called Crispr [pronounced “crisper”] would even be defined as GM crops under the existing European legislation, she said.
“There is no way that legislation based on processes is ever going to keep up with the introduction of new ways of doing things. You need a more robust regulatory system that is immune to the way that you do the changes,” she added.
Professor Huw Jones, a crop scientist at Rothamsted Research in Hertfordshire, said that the DNA changes made by Crispr can be identical to mutations produced by conventional crop breeding, but that it is not clear whether crops generated by Crispr will be subject to European Commission rules governing GM crops.
“We need a regulation that is fit for purpose. It would cover the risks inherent in the technology but it should also be consistent,” Professor Jones said.
“If a herbicide-tolerant crop has an environmental impact – and I’m not saying it does – it doesn’t matter how you make it. That impact should be analysed and risk-assessed as the characteristic per se, and not because of the technology,” he said.
Crispr is the latest and most powerful of the genome-editing technologies. It is based on a bacterial enzyme that can recognise and cut the DNA of a plant at any given point in the genome, whereas “conventional” GM involved the transfer of entire genes from one organism to another at random.
“In these days of genome sequencing you can sequence the entire genome and demonstrate the only changes you have made [from Crispr] are no different to anything that could be obtained from conventional breeding,” said Professor Sophien Kamoun, president of the International Society for Molecular Plant Microbe Interactions.
“Mutations are occurring all the time in conventional breeding so that the only thing you are doing here is having a much more precise and rapid way of doing that,” Professor Kamoun said.
“You can generate limitless variations within the crop but the fundamental differences to conventional GM is that you are not actually moving genes from one organism to another,” he said.
- 1 Avengers: Age of Ultron: Nearly 700 German cinemas refuse to show movie
- 2 Donald Trump decides that Baltimore riots are Barack Obama's fault
- 3 X Factor in crisis as numbers of people auditioning plummets
- 4 General Election 2015: Stephen Hawking says he will vote Labour
- 5 Baltimore riots: Furious mother marches her son home live on TV
Bali Nine executions live: Indonesian firing squad shoots dead eight drug offenders despite outcry around world, but a ninth is spared
Keith Harris dead: Orville the Duck ventriloquist dies aged 67 following battle with cancer
The four utterly contradictory polls that tell the story of this election and why it is pointless trying to predict the outcome
Donald Trump decides that Baltimore riots are Barack Obama's fault
General Election 2015: Prospect of Labour-SNP coalition makes one in four voters less likely to support Ed Miliband, says survey
General Election 2015: Chuka Umunna on the benefits of immigration, humility – and his leader Ed Miliband
The sickening truth about food banks that the Tories don't want you to know
Aaron and Melissa Klein: Oregon anti-gay bakers ordered to pay $135,000 after refusing to make cake for same-sex wedding
EU exit would hit UK economy much harder than neighbouring countries, study finds
Andrew Lloyd Webber: Phantom of the Opera writer mocked after issuing a warning about Ed Miliband and Nicola Sturgeon
General election 2015: Labour will toughen hate crimes legislation surrounding Islamophobia
£23000 - £25000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: This firm of accountants based ...
£30000 - £38000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: They are a financial services c...
£30000 - £32000 per annum + car allowance and on call: Ashdown Group: A succes...
£15000 - £17000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: Well established small company ...