FORESIGHT has been conspicuous by its absence in the unfolding revolution in genetic modification. That applies not only to agribiotech companies, which might perhaps be understandable, but to governments as well. Both arrogantly assumed that consumers would accept foreign genes in crops without debate. They soon came to regret it. In the light of this, it would be good to think that lessons had been learned about keeping the public informed and backing policy with good science.
Now our fields are about to be graced by crops that contain genes for pharmaceuticals. 鈥淧harming鈥�, as it鈥檚 known, is an appealing idea for making cheap drugs and vaccines. But it has a worrying side too, which should be obvious to all. It would take just one case of contamination in which a person was harmed by a crop laced with a potent drug for the entire nascent industry to face shutdown. So you鈥檇 think that this time round, industry and government would make absolutely certain that measures for confining these crops and their pollen would be watertight.
Think again.
Advertisement
For a start, why have companies chosen to add these genes to food plants? The simple answer is that food crops grow fast, produce loads of protein, and we know lots about how to manipulate their genes. But it鈥檚 still a daft decision. Let鈥檚 rephrase the question. Why on Earth are companies adding these genes to plants which through pollination or mix-ups with seeds could allow the genes and their products to find their way into food?
The reply to this one tends to be that such worries are unfounded: all the genes added to plants so far are for proteins which should be digested in the stomach. Unfortunately we can鈥檛 confirm this, because the US Department of Agriculture has judged that which genes are added to plants is commercially confidential. But let鈥檚 hope that it鈥檚 true, and that it is a strict enough safeguard 鈥� it would be reassuring to see the supporting research results 鈥� and that no genes for toxic compounds will ever be included in food plants.
The USDA has just announced its proposed confinement measures for field trials of pharm crops, which include setting minimum buffer zones around those fields (see 鈥淒rug genes could enter food chain鈥�). How were the size of these buffers arrived at? That鈥檚 a secret too, says the USDA. This attitude is hardly reassuring, not least because the science of confinement is new and very little is known about it. As one American agricultural scientist put it: 鈥淚鈥檓 not an expert on confinement. Hardly anyone is.鈥� That being so, the criteria used for arriving at buffer zones and how they were tested should at least be open to review.
There is a solution to this problem, or at least a partial one. That is to make sure that the seeds of pharm crops are sterile or don鈥檛 contain the offending gene. Food and pharm seeds could still get mixed up, of course, but at least drug genes would not be spread through pollination. Thankfully, plenty of work has been done on stopping this gene flow. Indeed, rather than too little thought, there鈥檚 a temptation to see what鈥檚 going on here as scientific overkill.
The latest fruit from this area is Exorcist, a genetic trick that cuts out foreign genes on command (see 鈥淏egone! evil genes鈥�). At present it鈥檚 still a thought experiment, but if it becomes reality it could be incredibly flexible. Genes could be removed by spraying fields, or by plants themselves when they reach a certain stage in their life cycle. There鈥檚 even the prospect of being able to remove genes from specific tissues, including seeds.
The inventor of this idea likes to see it as a way to weed out the aspects of genetic engineering that people don鈥檛 like. It will let farmers benefit from plants with in-built pesticide, for instance, while consumers enjoy GM-free food. If people don鈥檛 want GM pollen flying around, then Exorcist will see to that too. He hopes to separate people with genuine concerns from plain old Luddites.
But it seems the characteristic lack of foresight is at work here too. Many people oppose GM crops on principle, because they reinforce an agricultural system that concentrates power in the hands of multinational companies and big farmers to the detriment of small farmers and the world鈥檚 hungry (see New 杏吧原创, 15 June, page 3). Exorcist will do nothing to persuade such people of GM crops鈥� virtues.
One of the ironies of Exorcist is that it must convince those who mistrust GM technology that their health, and the environment鈥檚, will be safeguarded by a piece of GM technology. That鈥檚 a tall order indeed.