Fighting against genome editing with yesterday’s weapons
Politics

Fighting against genome editing with yesterday’s weapons

The Council of States (upper house of the Federal Assembly of Switzerland) intends to allow genome editing provided that no foreign genetic material is inserted into new plant varieties through this method. The decision is causing consternation among genetic engineering skeptics. But you only have to look at their arguments to see that the opponents of genetic engineering are fighting with yesterday’s weapons.

Wednesday, December 8, 2021

According to the Bauernzeitung newspaper, the decision of the Council of States did not meet with a positive response from “die Grünen” (the Green Party of Switzerland). In a media release, the party stated that through this decision, the Council of States was “jeopardizing one of the most important quality characteristics of Swiss agriculture, its GE (genetic engineering) free status.” They are concerned that genetic engineering methods are still in their infancy. And that there are no market-ready products and no risk research either. In addition to the Green Party, the Swiss Smallholder Association (VKMB) and the Swiss GMO-free Alliance (Allianz Gentechfrei) also oppose the decision of the Council of States. They also stress the “unjustifiable risks” that new breeding methods present. The Umwelt magazine published by the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (BAFU) even states that: “The risks of this technology [genome editing] are also not yet sufficiently known.”

The aid organization Swissaid has also contributed its opinion on this political discussion with a media release. While it is clear that only through agricultural productivity and innovation will we be able to feed a world with close to 10 billion people, Swissaid refuses to accept the facts and presents new genetic engineering methods as a threat to biodiversity— without any scientific basis for this. In the opinion of the Swiss Expert Committee for Biosafety (EFBS), the scientific evidence does not provide any grounds for prohibiting the new breeding methods.


Risk is no higher than with traditional crops

The talk of risks that are still unknown and the denial of opportunities is a popular means of blocking new technologies. The opponents of genome editing repeatedly stress the fact that the research is still incomplete as far as risk assessments are concerned. However there is an overwhelming scientific consensus in the assessment of the risks caused by genome editing in particular. The risk presented by genome-edited crops is no higher than with traditionally bred crops. Researchers from various Swiss universities and colleges have therefore urged in favor of relaxing the moratorium on genetic engineering. And this scientific consensus needs to be accepted. Those in green circles frequently refer to the scientific consensus on climate change. So it is revealing that the same parties are now ignoring the voices of science regarding allowing genome editing. The Tages-Anzeiger newspaper describes this attitude as “bizarre”. Ideology and repeating old stories are clearly more important than solving specific problems.

Interview with Prof. Wilhelm Gruissem
In his interview with Reto Brennwald, Prof. Wilhelm Gruissem from the ETH Zurich university explains why it is scientifically untenable to claim that the data situation is unclear—both for traditional genetic engineering and for genome editing.

Related articles

Genome Editing: Standards are being relaxed all over the world
Politics

Genome Editing: Standards are being relaxed all over the world

Great Britain has already decided on its first steps, Switzerland has too: The handling of simple genome-edited plants is being made easier.

Questions about solidarity in agricultural production remain open
Politics

Questions about solidarity in agricultural production remain open

The war between Russia and Ukraine threatens the global food supply. Security of supply is also becoming an issue in Switzerland. In the spring session, parliamentarians from various parties wanted to know from the Federal Council how it intends to react to the changed global food supply situation. The Federal Council's replies do not yet reflect a fundamental reassessment of the situation.

Parliament decides on a change of course in green genetic engineering
Politics

Parliament decides on a change of course in green genetic engineering

According to the National Council, the Council of States has also spoken out in favor of a loosening of the Gene-Tech Moratorium. The Federal Assembly takes the arguments from the scientific community into account with the decision. The opportunities presented by new breeding technologies are greater than the risks. The Federal Council is now called upon to initiate the approval of new breeding methods.

“Different Rules for Genome Editing Are Welcome”
Politics

“Different Rules for Genome Editing Are Welcome”

The Swiss Federal Council and the National Council of Switzerland want to put new cultivation methods under the existing GMO moratorium. A majority of the SECC-S decided on Tuesday that the cultivation of genome-edited plants is to be permitted subject to requirements. We discussed this decision with Jan Lucht, an expert on biotechnology from scienceindustries.

More contributions from Politics