1.0 INTRODUCTION TO GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD

1.1 Genetically Modified Food (GMF)

World Health Organisation defined Genetically Modified Foods (GMFs) as the foods that

produced from or using Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). Genetically modified

organisms (GMOs) referred as organisms such as animals, plants or microorganisms in

which the genetic material (DNA) has been artificially manipulated or altered in a way

that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination. The process which

involves laboratory works involves the knowledge of modern biotechnology, recombinant

DNA technology or genetic engineering. This technology allows selected individual genes

to be transferred from one organism into another, also between nonrelated species.

1.2 Purpose of GMFs

Genetically Modified Foods are developed and marketed as there is demand and some

perceived advantage to the food producer and also the consumer. GMF intended to

product a food product with a lower price but with greater benefit such as in the terms of

durability or nutritional value or both. GMF crops could decrease the cost of production

and have positive effects on the environment in both developed and developing countries.

The advancement of GMF also greatly contributed in agricultural industry. Some benefits

of genetic engineering in agriculture especially in plants are:

i. Increased crop yields

ii. Reduced costs for food or drug production

iii. Reduced need for pesticides

iv. Enhanced nutrient composition and food quality

v. Resistance to pests and disease

vi. Greater food security and medical benefits to the world's growing population.

vii. Developing crops that mature faster and tolerate extreme environmental condition,

allowing plants to grow in conditions where they might not otherwise flourish

A number of animals have also been genetically engineered to increase yield and decrease

susceptibility to disease. For example:

i. Cattle have been enhanced to exhibit resistance to mad cow disease. (United States

Department of Energy, 2007).

ii. Salmon have been engineered to grow larger and mature faster.

1.3 Method of GMFs Production

GMFs are made through a process known as genetic engineering. Genes of interest are

transferred from one organism to another. Two primary methods currently exist for

introducing transgenes into plant genomes.

i. The first involves a device called a ‘gene gun.’ The DNA to be introduced into the

plant cells is coated onto tiny particles. These particles are then physically shot

onto plant cells. Some of the DNA comes off and is incorporated into the DNA of

the recipient plant.

ii. The second method uses a bacterium to introduce the gene(s) of interest into the

plant DNA.

Figure 1: Schematic diagram of how GMF are made

1.4 Example of GMF Application

Some example of GMF application are summarize in Table 1 below:

Table 1: Examples of GMOs Resulting from Agricultural Biotechnology (Adapted from Phillips, T., 2008)

Genetically

Conferred Trait

Organisms Genetic Altered

Insect resistance Corn Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) is a naturally-occurring soil

borne bacterium that is found worldwide. There are

several strains of Bt, each with differing Cry proteins.

Proteins have been found with insecticidal activity

against the European corn borer (Cry1Ab, Cry1Ac,

Cry9C). Most of the Bt corn hybrids, targeted against

European corn borer, produce only the Cry1Ab

protein; a few produce the Cry1Ac protein or the

Cry9C protein. Modifying a corn plant to produce its

own Bt protein overcomes these problems. Plants

produce the protein in tissues where larvae feed.

Finally, the protein is present whenever newly-hatched

larvae try to feed, so the timing of Bt application is not

a problem. The result is an efficient and consistent

built-in system to deliver Bt proteins to the target pest.

Herbicide

tolerance

Soybean Glyphosate herbicide kills plants by blocking the

EPSPS enzyme, an enzyme involved in the

biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids, vitamins and

many secondary plant metabolites. There are several

ways by which crops can be modified to be

glyphosate-tolerant. One strategy is to incorporate a

soil bacterium gene, Agrobacterium tumefaciens,

strain CP4 that produces a glyphosate-tolerant form of

EPSPS. Another way is to incorporate a different soil

bacterium gene that produces a glyphosate degrading

enzyme.

Vitamin

enrichment

Rice Golden rice is a variety of rice (Oryza sativa)

produced through genetic engineering to biosynthesize

beta-carotene, a precursor of vitamin A, in the edible

parts of rice. The research was conducted with the goal

of producing a fortified food to be grown and

consumed in areas with a shortage of dietary vitamin

A. A key breakthrough was the discovery that a single

phytoene desaturase gene (bacterial Crtl) can be used

to produce lycopene from phytoene in GM tomato,

rather than having to introduce the multiple carotene

desaturases that are normally used by higher plants.

Lycopene is then cyclized to beta-carotene by the

endogenous cyclase in Golden Rice.Golden rice was

created by transforming rice with only two beta-

carotene biosynthesis genes:

i. psy (phytoene synthase) from daffodil

(Narcissus pseudonarcissus)

ii. crtl (carotene desaturase) from the soil

bacterium Erwinia uredovora

Faster maturation Salmon A type 1 growth hormone gene injected into fertilized

fish eggs results in 6.2% retention of the vector at one

year of age, as well as significantly increased growth

rates. The GM eggs hatched two days earlier than the

non-GM cohort (4 versus 6 days). GM salmon had

reached a size more typical of two-year-old non-GM

salmon raised in the hatchery. The one-year-old GM

fish had also passed from the parr to smolt stage of

development, while this transformation took two years

for the non-GM salmon. The GM salmon became

sexually mature at two years of age, whereas the non-

GM salmon required three years to reach this stage of

development.

1.5 Debate on GMF

There are a number of ethical concerns over genetically modified (GM) foods and these have

all affected public support of the products. The issues have also triggered controversy and

regulations around GM foods and any company that produces these crops or products.

Concerns range from the environment to risks to our food web or issues concerning disease,

allergies and contamination.

1.5.1 Benefits: The Acceptance of GMF

i. Economical  

Farmers were convinced that they stand to make enormous profits from growing GM

crops. Initially, the GM crops are verycostly but money can be saved on other

expenditure such as on pesticides. To produce the GM crops, modern biotechnology is

used which requires highly skilled people and sophisticated and expensive

equipment. Large companies need considerable investments in laboratories, equipment

and human resources, hence the reason why GM crops are more expensive for farmers

than traditional crops. However GM crops are a far better option as it takes a shorter

time to produce the desired product, it is precise and there are no unwanted genes.

ii. Herbicide-resistant crops

GM crops can be produced to be herbicide resistant. This means that farmers could

spray these crops with herbicide and kill the weeds, without affecting other the crops.

This can reduce the amount of herbicide used which subsequently reduce the costs for

farmers and consumers. Biotechnology companies are even experimenting with crops

that can be genetically modified to be drought and salt-tolerant, or less reliant on

fertilizer, opening up new areas to be farmed and leading to increased productivity.

iii. Better quality foods  

Animals that genetically modified can be leaner, grow faster, and need less food. They

could also be modified to have special characteristics, such as greater milk production,

high nutritional content of vitamins, lower cholesterol level and suitable for people

with certain allergies. These modifications contribute to the improvement of

productivity for farmers and ultimately lower costs for the consumer. Modified crops

could perhaps prevent outbreaks such as foot and mouth disease, which has devastated

many farmers and local economies.

1.5.2 Risks: The Rejection of GMF

The major concerns of those who oppose GM foods focused on the:

i. Environmental damage  

The problem with GM crops is that effect in the ecosystem is still unknown. The

genetic structure of any living organism is complex and GM crop tests focus on short-

term effects. Not all the effects of introducing a foreign gene into the intricate genetic

structure of an organism are tested. There is always the possibility that GM crops

might not be able to be destroyed once they spread into the natural ecosystem. In

Europe, for example, a strain of sugar beet that was genetically modified to be

resistant to a particular herbicide has accidently assimilated the genes to resist another.

This was discovered when farmers attempted to destroy the crop in Britain, France and

the Netherlands, where it was being tested, and 0.5% of the crop survived.

ii. Lack of biodiversity

When a GMF is first introduced, the seeds are usually derived from a single strain. If

this crop becomes greatly popular, it will result with multiple farmers planting one and

only one strain or variety of the crop, leaving all of the new crops exposed to disease.

For example, the Rainbow papaya, the strain chosen to receive the transgene for

ringspot-virus resistance turned out to be vulnerable to the blackspot fungus. The

problem can be avoided by breeding the GM trait into several varieties using

conventional methods. GMFs are not the only crops lacking biodiversity, nor are lack

of biodiversity a new concern. This would likely be less of a problem if more GMF

companies were able to enter into the market providing more variety of crops, or if the

GMF crops could be allowed to hybridize with other strains. In other words, it's a

problem caused by the restrictions on GMF crops.

What current health factors and concerns need to be considered when developing new

food products?

Genetically modified organisms (GMO’s) are a broad group of plants, animals, and

bacteria that are engineered for a wide variety of applications ranging from agricultural

production to scientific research. The types of potential hazards posed by GMO’s vary

according to the type of organism being modified and its intended application. Most of the

concern surrounding GMO’s relates to their potential for negative effects on the environment

and human health. Because GMO’s that could directly affect human health are primarily

products that can enter the human food supply, this website focuses on genetically modified

food. To date, the only types of products that have been approved for human consumption in

the U.S. are genetically modified plants (FDA website).

All genetically modified foods that have been approved are considered by the

government to be as safe as their traditional counterparts and are generally unregulated (FDA

website). However, there are several types of potential health effects that could result from the

insertion of a novel gene into an organism. Health effects of primary concern to safety

assessors are production of new allergens, increased toxicity, decreased nutrition, and

antibiotic resistance (Bernstein et al., 2003).

1. Food Allergy

Food Allergy affects approximately 5% of children and 2% of adults in the U.S. and is a

significant public health threat .Allergic reactions in humans occur when a normally harmless

protein enters the body and stimulates an immune response .If the novel protein in a GM food

comes from a source that is know to cause allergies in humans or a source that has never been

consumed as human food, the concern that the protein could elicit an immune response in

humans increases. Although no allergic reactions to GM food by consumers have been

confirmed, in vitro evidence suggesting that some GM products could cause an allergic

reaction has motivated biotechnology companies to discontinue their development.

2. Increased Toxicity

Most plants produce substances that are toxic to humans. Most of the plants that humans

consume produce toxins at levels low enough that they do not produce any adverse health

effects. There is concern that inserting an exotic gene into a plant could cause it to produce

toxins at higher levels that could be dangerous to humans. This could happen through the

process of inserting the gene into the plant. If other genes in the plant become damaged during

the insertion process it could cause the plant to alter its production of toxins. Alternatively, the

new gene could interfere with a metabolic pathway causing a stressed plant to produce more

toxins in response. Although these effects have not been observed in GM plants, they have

been observed through conventional breeding methods creating a safety concern for GM

plants. For example, potatoes conventionally bred for increased diseased resistance have

produced higher levels of glycoalkaloids.

3. Decreased Nutritional Value

A genetically modified plant could theoretically have lower nutritional quality than its

traditional counterpart by making nutrients unavailable or indigestible to humans. For

example, phytate is a compound common in seeds and grains that binds with minerals and

makes them unavailable to humans. An inserted gene could cause a plant to produce higher

levels of phytate decreasing the mineral nutritional value of the plant Another example comes

from a study showing that a strain of genetically modified soybean produced lower levels of

phytoestrogen compounds, believed to protect against heart disease and cancer, than

traditional soybeans.

4. Antibiotic resistance

In recent years health professionals have become alarmed by the increasing number of

bacterial strains that are showing resistance to antibiotics. Bacteria develop resistance to

antibiotics by creating antibiotic resistance genes through natural mutation. Biotechnologists

use antibiotic resistance genes as selectable markers when inserting new genes into plants. In

the early stages of the process scientists do not know if the target plant will incorporate the

new gene into its genome. By attaching the desired gene to an antibiotic resistance gene the

new GM plant can be tested by growing it in a solution containing the corresponding

antibiotic. If the plant survives scientists know that it has taken up the antibiotic resistance

gene along with the desired gene. There is concern that bacteria living in the guts of humans

and animals could pick up an antibiotic resistance gene from a GM plant before the DNA

becomes completely digested.

It is not clear what sort of risk the possibility of conferring antibiotic resistance to bacteria

presents. No one has ever observed bacteria incorporating new DNA from the digestive

system under controlled laboratory conditions. The two types of antibiotic resistance genes

used by biotechnologists are ones that already exist in bacteria in nature so the process would

not introduce new antibiotic resistance to bacteria. Never the less it is a concern and the FDA

is encouraging biotechnologists to phase out the practice of using antibiotic resistance genes.

Figure 1: Growing Evidence of Harm From GMO

Figure 2: Growing Evidence of Harm From GMO

Food Technology

Discuss the influence of changing consumer lifestyles on food product development.

Food product development needs to be based on consumers’ needs and wishes to be successful. Factors that have become relevant in respect to changing in consumer lifestyles in the world and their impacts upon worldwide food product development are presented discussed like:-

Cultural influences Aging and health issues Busy lifestyles Food safety and ethical issues Environmental issues

1. Cultural Influences

Culture has been defined by Hofstede and Hofstede (2005) as “the collective

programming of the mind that distinguishes the members of one group or category of

people from another”. Harrison and Huntington also added to the culture definition that the

ideas that distinguish one group of people from another must be socially inherited and

customary; “and they must actually be constitutive of different ways of life”. Common

examples of factors that usually shape a culture include religion, behavior, relation with

nature, relation with other humans, and traditions. In short, cultural factors are coming

from the different components related to culture or cultural environment from which the

consumer belongs and influence the consumer’s behavior on food choices.

In respect to this factor, food industries have development various food products that

fit into consumer market from different parts of the world. For instance, McDonald’s is a

brilliant example of adaptation to the specificities of each culture and each market. Well

aware of the importance to have an offer with specific products to meet the needs and

tastes of consumers from different cultures, the fast-food giant has for example: a

McBaguette in France (with french baguette and Dijon mustard), a Chicken Maharaja Mac

and a Masala Grill Chicken in India (with Indian spices) as well as a Mega Teriyaki Burger

(with teriyaki sauce) or Gurakoro (with macaroni gratin and croquettes) in Japan. While all

the ingredients used by McDonald’s in arabic and muslim countries are certified halal. The

fast food chain is not offering, of course, any product with bacon or pork.

2. Aging and Health Issues

The number of older persons - defined as aged 60 and over is growing in virtually all

countries, and worldwide trends are likely to continue. In 2002 there were an estimated 605

million older persons in the world, nearly 400 million of whom were living in low-income

countries. According to WHO (2012), by 2025, the number of older persons worldwide is

expected to reach more than 1.2 billion, with about 840 million of these in low-income

countries. As populations in high-income countries age, it becomes more apparent that

investments in ageing and health, including nutrition are essential, ensuring that older

persons continue to contribute productively to society as workers, volunteers and providers

instead of being only recipients of care. Besides, many of the diseases suffered by older

persons are the result of dietary factors, some of which have been operating since infancy.

For example, osteoporosis and associated fractures are a major cause of illness, disability

and death, and are a huge medical expense.

In the last decades, consumer demands in the field of food production have changed

considerably. Consumers more and more believe that foods contribute directly to their

health (Mollet & Rowland, 2002; Young, 2000). Today foods are not intended to only

satisfy hunger and to provide necessary nutrients for humans but also to prevent nutrition-

related diseases and improve physical and mental well-being of the consumers (Menrad,

2003 and Roberfroid, 2000b). In this regard, functional foods play an outstanding role. A

food marketed as functional contains added, technologically developed ingredients with a

specific health benefit (Niva, 2007).

Most early developments of functional foods were those of fortified with vitamins

and/or minerals such as vitamin C, vitamin E, folic acid, zinc, iron, and calcium (Sloan,

2000). Subsequently, the focus shifted to foods fortified with various micronutrients such

as omega-3 fatty acid, phytosterol, and soluble fiber to promote good health or to prevent

diseases such as cancers (Sloan, 2002). More recently, food companies have taken further

steps to develop food products that offer multiple health benefits in a single food (Sloan,

2004). Functional foods have been developed in virtually all food categories such as

probiotics, prebiotics, functional meats, functional eggs and etc.

3. Busy Lifestyles

These changing consumer needs were a result of major macro-economic changes that

occurred worldwide in the last few decades. Increased female participation in the workforce,

increased incomes and general economic growth has resulted in many ‘cash rich, time poor’

consumers. Busy lifestyle encouraged the convenient food products. Forbairt (1998) defines

convenient foods as ‘all products which have undergone secondary processing including

ready meals, processed meats, pizzas, pies, savoury products, ice-cream and confectionery

products, dairy desserts, soups and other prepared consumer ready products. In a study of

Consumer Watch (2002), convenience was associated with reducing the input required from

consumers in either food shopping, preparation, cooking or cleaning after the meal.

A case study has been done in Ireland, between 1986 and 1996 the number of

couples where both partners worked increased from 108,000 to 226,900 (CSO, 1986 and

CSO, 1996). Dual-income households are busy families or couples with somewhat larger

disposable income; an implication of this has again increased the use of convenience foods.

Gofton (1995) suggests that in these households the family is often served convenience foods

when parents are too tired and/or do not have enough time to prepare a home cooked meal.

McKenzie (1986) reported that although working women enhance the financial circumstances

of a household, a situation of ‘time poverty’ may develop. This leads to less time available for

household chorus and meal preparation.

4. Food Safety and Ethical Issues

Henson and Traill (1993) define food safety as the inverse of food risk—the

probability of not suffering some hazard from consuming a specific food. Potential

undesirable residues in foods span a broad range, from natural (e.g. mycotoxins) and

environmental contaminants (e.g. dioxins) to agro-chemicals (e.g. nitrates and pesticides),

veterinary drugs, growth promoters, packaging components, and many more. Microbiological

considerations are an even greater challenge to safety of food because potentially harmful

microorganisms have the ability either to grow rapidly from very low numbers in food or to

proliferate in the human body once ingested (Tent, 1999).

Genetic food engineering makes foods tolerant to herbicides and resistant to insect

damage via the incorporation of bacterial genes. A large number of novel foods or food

ingredients, such as new-leaf potatoes, soya, mazine and oilseed rape have been derived

through genetic modifications (Moseley, 1999 and Robiston, 1997). At the ethical level, there

are concerns about scientists “playing God,” such that genetic manipulation breaches the

natural boundaries between species that nature has established through the process of

evolution. Moreover, there are considerations that genetic manipulation of the technology is

expensive and will not be available to “poor” farming communities and that this may even

distort the economies of third world countries (Moseley, 1999).

At the consumer level, the primary concern about genetically engineered foods is

their safety, even though novel foods undergo extensive assessment for safety before approval

is granted (Robiston, 1997). There are also worries about the future safety of the technology,

such as the creation of super-weeds and the development of serious illness. Thus far, there

have been no reports of illness from the consumption of genetically modified foods (Moseley,

1999). However, consumers around the world differ in their concerns about genetic food

engineering. Hence, food manufacturers are required to make a clear label on the GM (genetic

modified) food products for consumers’ recognition.

5. Environmental Issues

Environmental factors are things that help reduce the impact of food production on

the environment and might cause someone to choose to buy a product. For example, locally

produced food doesn't have to be transported as far, so less carbon dioxide gas, CO 2 is

produced. This means there is less of an impact on the environment. Contemporary food

production and consumption cannot be regarded as sustainable and raises problems with its

wide scope involving diverse actors.

Moreover, in the face of demographic change and a growing global population,

sustainability problems arising from food systems will likely become more serious in the

future. For example, agricultural production must deal with the impacts of climate change,

increasingly challenging land-use conflicts, and rising health and social costs on both

individual and societal levels. The unsustainability of current arrangements arises from the

industrialization and globalization of agriculture and food processing, the shift of

consumption patterns toward more dietary animal protein, the emergence of modern food

styles that entail heavily processed products, the growing gap on a global scale between rich

and poor, and the paradoxical lack of food security amid an abundance of food.

In regard to the above issues, the world have diverted to the practice of sustainable

food consumption and production. Sustainable consumption and production in food and

agriculture is a consumer-driven, holistic concept that refers to the integrated implementation

of sustainable patterns of food consumption and production, respecting the carrying capacities

of natural ecosystems. There are food-policy instruments available and currently in use in EU

member states to promote sustainable food systems as summarised in Table 1.

Table 1: Framework of policy instruments to promote sustainable food systems.

As many consumers shifted to vegetarianism, this opens the market for vegan foods which

believe to help to reduce meat consumption and reduce environmental impacts. For example,

an article in Marketing Week (http://www.marketingweek.co.uk 2011) mentions that UK

consumers can relate to flexible vegetarianism or “Flexitarianism” and that it is a solution for

many who want to reduce their meat consumption without giving up meat totally. However,

around half of the consumers surveyed stated health and reducing their grocery bills as the

main reasons for buying meat free products, whereby only 4 % stated environmental reasons.

Quorn has positioned itself as a non - threatening alternative to meat, as it can easily be used

as a substitute for meat in everyday meals without too much trouble. It has a 22 % share of the

meat free market. Quorn (microbe-protein) shows a significant development of sustainable

food production by application of biotechnology and microbiology.

Besides, advances in food processing and packaging play a primary role in keeping

the food safe to be consumed. Packaging protects food between processing and usage by the

consumer. Following usage, food packaging must be removed in an environmentally

responsible manner. Packaging technology must therefore balance food protection with other

issues, including energy and material costs, heightened social and environmental

consciousness, and strict regulations on pollutants and disposal of municipal solid waste

(MSW).

References

1. Harrison, L.E, & Huntington, S.P. (2000). Culture matters how values shape human

progress. New York: Basic Books

2. WHO (2012) Nutrition for older persons. Ageing and nutrition: a growing global

challenge http://www.who.int/nutrition/topics/ageing/en/index.html

3. Central Statistics Office (1986). Household budget survey. Cork, Ireland.

4. Central Statistics Office (1996). Household budget survey. Cork, Ireland.

5. L Gofton (1995). Convenience and the moral status of consumer practices

D.W Marshall (Ed.), Food choice and the consumer, Chapman and Hall, UK

6. J McKenzie (1996). An integrated approach—with special reference to the study of

changing food habits in the United Kingdom. C Ritson, L Gofton, J McKenzie (Eds.),

The food consumer, Wiley and Sons Ltd, UK (1996), pp. 155–167.

7. S Henson, B Traill (1993). Consumer perceptions of food safety and their impact on

food choice. G.G Birch, G Campbell-Platt (Eds.), Food safety—the challenge ahead,

Intercept, Andover , pp. 39–55

8. E.B Moseley (1999). The safety and social acceptance of novel foods. International

Journal of Food Microbiology, 50, pp. 25–31

9. C Robiston (1997). Genetically modified foods and consumer choice. Trends in

Food Science Technology, 8, pp. 84–88

10. H Tent (1999). Research on food safety in the 21st century. Food Control, 10, pp.

239–241

11.