The Genetic Engineering Works conducted a survey on the views on GMOs. I read a lot of comments, and I also read the arguments for many rumors in Nutshell. After that, I wrote these things intermittently. I wanted to post them and discuss them with everyone. .
The so-called genetically modified food is to transfer one or several exogenous genes into a specific organism through genetic engineering technology, and make it effectively express the corresponding product (polypeptide or protein ), this process is called genetic modification. Foods produced using genetically modified organisms as raw materials are genetically modified foods.
There is currently a big debate on the safety of genetically modified foods. Personally, I support genetically modified foods, but I admit that genetically modified crops have potential risks in terms of ecological balance. Resistance genes may undergo genetic drift, Long term selection produces super pests and more. But in terms of food, transgenics only transfer existing genes for good traits across species into the body to modify traits. The materials are all existing in nature, and the heterologous substances produced during the expression process are all contained in the biological world itself, and even We get it from other foods. The insertion of the receptor's own sequence after transgene, destroying it, and changing the expression of the original substance of the receptor is an important analysis in the safety assessment of the transgenic operation. It is impossible for this kind of product to flow out of the experimental stage. Because of the suspicion about the hidden dangers of genetically modified foods, the review of genetically modified products is very strict. The impact on humans, including toxicity, allergy, nutritional content, etc., are all subject to strict review. If the review standards for genetically modified foods are followed, some common foods are currently They are not allowed to be circulated because some natural foods contain toxic substances, but under normal circumstances they will be metabolized by the human body without any impact. In the review of genetically modified foods, the presence of these substances needs to be strictly reviewed, let alone so-called toxic foods. my country's evaluation process includes five stages: experimental research, intermediate testing, environmental release, productive testing and biosafety certificate. It usually takes at least 6-8 years for a genetically modified crop to complete all management review procedures. Therefore, some people say that if the insects eat it, they will die. , How can people be okay after eating it, etc. are irresponsible remarks that are arbitrarily denied without understanding the situation.
Most of the currently circulating hidden dangers of genetically modified products are safety issues after long-term use. The issue of long-term hidden dangers cannot be proven or refuted at present. After all, the genetically modified food industry is quite young. This suspicion is also consistent with the precautionary principle in the international risk assessment principles for the safety of GM (genetically modified) biological products, that is, when there is scientific uncertainty, Preventive measures can be taken. It is reasonable and responsible to retain this suspicion, but the implication of this principle is more and more used by more and more countries importing biotechnology products as effective non-tariff trade barrier measures. This suspicion has become an objection to unknown developments. The reason is unreasonable. The European Union has the most stringent management of genetically modified foods. They believe that genetic recombinant technology itself is potentially dangerous, and any activities related to genetic recombination should be subject to safety evaluation and management. Even so, the EU has approved the cultivation of 2 genetically modified plants and the import and sale of 44 genetically modified crops.
When it comes to trade barriers, I think the rhetoric about genetic modification may be largely linked to political economy. After all, food issues have a lot of power in international competitions, not to mention that in a mature system of bioenergy development, food It is a common phenomenon as raw materials (corn ethanol, soybean biodiesel, etc.). The excellence of genetically modified crops is well known. Currently, 90% of the seed patents of genetically modified crops are in the hands of the United States. It is necessary to use arguments to limit technological development and trade dumping to buy time for their own development. A very reasonable move. I have read many posts about opinions on genetically modified foods. Many of them are impossible to identify with a little understanding. However, many people still agree. Why do so many people think that genetically modified foods are so terrible without understanding them? Where did the bad first impression come from? It’s all in the eye of the beholder
The possible problem with the reasonable genetic modification I have seen is that the integrity of the foreign gene is preserved in the digestive tract after digestion. Will the DNA fragments enter the digestive tract colonies or even epithelial cells and be integrated into the genome?
This probability is very small. After all, there are no restriction enzymes in the digestive tract, and the probability of keeping the exogenous DNA intact is already very low; during transgenic operations, the conversion rate of high-concentration vectors under the most suitable conditions is already very low, and even more What's more, in the digestive tract environment; the renewal rate of intestinal endophytes and digestive tract epithelial cells is also very fast, so this may be the same as the above-mentioned metabolism of ordinary food in the body. In addition, maize has frequent transposition phenomenon under natural conditions. These transposable sequences will also be ingested by us, but I forgot whether maize transposition has requirements for receptor sequences. Since maize is fine, these transferred sequences It’s not a big problem either.
Attached is another question I have: Why is there no such debate about mutation breeding, especially space breeding, as there is about genetic modification? Although mutations are indeed a normal phenomenon in nature, who can guarantee that high-frequency mutations will not occur? Generating potential factors that are harmful to the human body, transgenics still use mature reaction systems evolved in nature to change traits. Mutants are more likely to be unknown substances. In comparison, those that produce unknown things are more hidden dangers. The failed products of space breeding have never been exposed. I know that space breeding also needs to undergo complex passage screening after returning, but there are still questions about the strict directional transformation of transgenes, not to mention the majority of harmful mutations, and those bad mutants will never Not reported. Do all countries have such conditions? There is no need for technical pressure and there is no need for public pressure.