Even the pasta from the organic speciality shop cannot be produced without genetic engineering
The EU is currently debating the regulation of new plant breeding methods. The discussion is also underway in Germany. The knowledge magazine Terra X has taken this discussion as an opportunity to look at the topic in more detail.
Wednesday, October 27, 2021
The science magazine Terra X took this discussion as an opportunity to look at the topic in more detail. The programme shows how far-reaching the opportunities of genome editing are, especially in view of rapidly changing environmental conditions. Above all, however, it becomes clear how contradictory the current regime is: for example, food is already being sold today under the organic label that has been bred by intervening in the genome of plants (undirected mutagenesis). The programme was probably also an eye-opener for many a convinced organic consumer.
Mutation and genetic engineering: when lawyers decide on scientific issues
For a long time it was taken for granted. The same regulations apply to plants from mutation breeding as to those from conventional breeding: none except for plant variety rights.
In July 2018, however, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that mutagenesis with radiation or chemicals also leads to a "genetically modified organism" (GMO), as "a change to the genetic material of an organism that is not possible in the natural way is carried out". At the same time, plants (and animals) produced in this way are exempt from the provisions applicable under genetic engineering law, such as authorisation and labelling requirements. The ECJ judges justify this with the long experience that has been gained with mutation breeding. It is therefore justified to regard the resulting plants as "safe" without further testing.
This experience is lacking in the new genome editing methods. Therefore, according to the ECJ judgement, they must be regulated in exactly the same way as a GMO. A genome-edited plant is subject to the same authorisation and labelling regulations as a genetically modified plant. Mutation breeding with random, individually unknown genetic changes is generally considered safe because the process has been used for a long time.
Genome editing, which is based on a precise mutation at a precisely known location in the genome, is categorised by the ECJ as "novel" and the plants bred with it as unsafe - as long as the contrary is not proven. However, the ECJ judgement is not scientific expertise, but a legal interpretation of laws that were passed 25 years ago and reflect the state of science at the time, which is now long outdated. Today's scientists rightly claim that there is over 30 years of experience in the safe application of classical genetic engineering and that this can be used for even more precise genome editing.
Related articles
Residues, thresholds, trust – looking calmly behind the headlines
In this conversation with toxicologist Lothar Aicher, the discussion focuses on how residues enter the body, how their potential harm is assessed, and what role modern analytical methods play.
Hazard is not the same as risk: how we understand – and should understand – threshold values
In this episode of the podcast, risk researcher Angela Bearth discusses residues and threshold values in food – a topic often debated emotionally. In public discussions, threshold values tend to dominate, while the complex challenges of agriculture are rarely considered. Studies show, however, that once these relationships are explained and solutions are addressed, people respond in a more differentiated way.
PFAS, trade-offs and responsibility – how politics and agriculture find solutions
In this episode of the joint series by Agrarpolitik – der Podcast and swiss-food.ch, National Councillor Christine Badertscher discusses how residues and threshold values are debated in Parliament.
Thresholds, approvals, responsibility – how plant protection products are really assessed
Threshold values are often at the centre of public debate – yet in reality they are only a small part of a much broader risk assessment system. Dr Michael Beer, Head of the Food and Nutrition Division at the Federal Food Safety Office, provides clarity.