On November 19, 2015, the US FDA approved the marketing of genetically modified salmon, which is the world's first edible genetically modified fish approved for industrialization. This caused a sensation in the world, and Chinese public opinion is also highly concerned about this incident.
The big ones are genetically modified salmon
What many media outlets do not report is that China was the first country in the world to successfully develop genetically modified fish. As early as 1983, a team led by Zhu Zuoyan of the Institute of Hydrobiology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences had introduced recombinant human growth hormone genes into crucian carp fertilized eggs to obtain fast-growing genetically modified fish. The New York Times in 1990 said that China's research was three years ahead of the United States.
On this basis, Zhu Zuoyan constructed a "whole fish" gene construct consisting entirely of genetic elements of Chinese carps in 1991. He introduced grass carp growth hormone genes driven by carp actin promoters into the fertilized eggs of Yellow Carp, and the genetically modified Yellow Carp grew fast and the bait conversion efficiency was high. Under the same breeding conditions, the average growth rate of transgenic carp is 52.93-114.92% faster than that of the control Yellow River carp, which can reach the market specifications in the same year, shorten the breeding cycle by half, reduce the cost and risk of breeding, and greatly reduce the labor intensity.
Turn "whole fish" GH gene Yellow River carp (left) and its control fish picture, Figure Xinhua Net
Nowadays, honor has become an embarrassment, and the person who starts to lead the way has not become a line bumper. Speaking of this, Zhu Zuoyan, the world's first transgenic fish and an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, told the "Gene Agriculture Network", "Our genetically modified Yellow River carp has long been prepared, and now there is only a lack of government decision-making access. ”
Gene Agriculture Network: Chinese society is very concerned about the approval of genetically modified salmon in the United States, what do you think about this?
Zhu Zuoyan: This is a great thing. Not just for fish, but also for other GM efforts that are driving agriculture.
The U.S. government has strict procedures on this matter and is very cautious. There are also people who have different opinions, but in the end they can make decisions, which shows that the competent authorities judge this issue on a scientific basis. Coupled with the consideration of future social needs and the maturity of related technologies, they made this courageous decision that represented the way forward.
Gene Farming Network: That is, science eventually prevails.
Zhu Zuoyan: The United States is a leading country in all aspects of modern science and technology, and in the innovation industry, scientific decision-making is the most important, although it also fully takes into account some of the different opinions in public opinion, but it has not catered to it and has not accommodated.
Gene Agriculture Network: What are the current research areas of genetically modified fish that are focused on?
Zhu Zuoyan: Fish is very difficult to make, because fish living in the water is not easy to observe, and the sexual maturity of economically farmed fish takes a long time, so it takes a long time to cultivate excellent varieties with stable traits. In fact, we mainly focus on growth rate and disease resistance, and some studies focus on cold resistance and quality improvement (such as reducing fish bones), but quality improvement research is very difficult. At present, the growth rate of fish is still the most important trait of concern for genetic improvement.
Gene Agriculture Network: What are the advantages of China's research situation?
Zhu Zuoyan: We have carried out basic research on improved fish growth rate very early, systematic and deep enough. Although the United States is listed, we want to be much more comprehensive in basic research. Such as the growth habits of fish, other biological effects of rapid growth, feed conversion and reproduction problems, and of course, food safety assessment. We have also conducted comprehensive and systematic ecosystem safety assessment studies, developed sterile lines of genetically modified fish, and managed them in isolation. But our fish is not yet on the market.
Gene Agriculture Network: Why aren't China's GM fish on the market first?
Zhu Zuoyan: We considered the first listing, but this is a bit of a nerdy idea, and it is impossible to rely on us to promote it. Basic research is only one of the factors of industrial innovation, and it also requires the participation of enterprises and the participation of enterprises with strategic vision. We have been in contact with some enterprises, and now there is a Chinese enterprise with high enthusiasm, and we have been in contact for more than a year.
Mr. Elliot Entis, the first president of AquaBounty Technologies, which cultivates genetically modified salmon, came to Wuhan ten years ago to seek cooperation possibilities and visited our breeding base. They were very interested in our research, but carp did not have much market prospect in the United States, so there was no following.
He said by analogy that the relevant documents provided by their company to the US government were one meter high, and they had special advisers and lawyers to do this.
However, whether genetically modified products can be industrialized is more important than the government's decision. If the relevant government departments lack scientific judgment, understanding and foresight of innovative products, it is impossible to have the courage to promote. If the competent authorities do not make up their minds and only play fifty boards on each side of the confrontation according to public opinion, this will not work. In this regard, the United States does have a set, and the efficiency is relatively high.
Gene Agriculture Network: If it was introduced with a bite of the teeth, it may have become, why didn't it push it at that time?
Zhu Zuoyan: In the 1980s, we did not have the ability to promote, and if there was a production department to take over, there might be good results.
When the leader of the Hubei Provincial Science and Technology Commission asked me when the product could be listed, I patted my head and said five or six years, because carp can be launched in two generations and three generations of breeding. We have done both food safety and ecological safety, and we want to be the first to go public. At that time, the leaders of the Hubei Provincial Science and Technology Commission had this awareness, and they felt that genetically modified fish grew fast, saved feed, and met the needs of production and development. But then there have been more negative reports of various GMOs, and now even the officials of the year may not be quick to take a stand.
Nowadays, most people in mainland society, including even many physicists, chemists, engineering experts, etc., I tell them about the problem of genetically modified fish, saying that our transgenic Yellow River carp is equivalent to the result of hybridizing with a grass carp gene and carp. Eating genetically modified Yellow River carp is equivalent to eating a plate of carp and drinking a drop of grass carp soup, which is a figurative metaphor. Since grass carp (including the whole genome) and carp hybridization will not be suspected, why worry so much about a product with grass carp genes and carp hybridization? I said it for half a day, and they still believe it, and even some people have a sense of mystery and fear when they talk about the word gene.
Considering various factors, I think it is inevitable that genetically modified fish will be listed first in the United States, and it is inevitable that we will not be the first to be listed.
Gene Farming Network: After all, the United States has a good start.
Zhu Zuoyan: This matter in the United States has increased the confidence of genetically modified agricultural scientists; it should also promote the competent government departments, which can take a bigger step; and it will also give some courage to our people, after all, Americans cherish health more, have more experience in food safety and ecological security, and they will deal with relevant issues more carefully.
Our genetically modified Yellow River carp is ready, and now there is only a lack of government access decisions.
Academician Zhu Zuoyan
Source: Institute of Hydrobiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences
Release on 2015-11-25
link:
http://www.ihb.cas.cn/xwzx/cmsj/201511/t20151125_4473439.html
appendix:
The transgenic Yellow River carp already has the conditions for industrialization
As a member of the National Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms Safety Committee, Hu Wei, a researcher at the Institute of Hydrobiology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, answered questions about the procedures of genetically modified fish at the government level.
Gene Agriculture Network: At present, China has clear regulations and provisions on genetically modified animal breeds to review or apply?
Hu Wei: At present, there are no clear regulations on the approval of varieties of genetically modified animals and genetically modified crops in China. The construction of relevant laws and regulations on the research and development management of genetically modified organisms in China is very lagging behind the development of scientific research and needs to be strengthened urgently.
The Revised Measures for the Administration of Aquatic Fry, which came into effect on April 1, 2005 of the Ministry of Agriculture, contains, "Article 34: The selection, cultivation, production, operation and import and export management of genetically modified aquatic fry shall comply with the Regulations on the Safety Management of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms and other relevant provisions of the State." ”
The Regulations on the Safety Management of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms and the Administrative Measures for the Safety Evaluation of Genetically Modified Organisms formulated in accordance with the Regulations stipulate that genetically modified animals must first obtain an agricultural genetically modified organism safety certificate for variety approval. To obtain a safety certificate, you must go through five stages, including laboratory research, intermediate testing, environmental release, productive testing, and safety certificate declaration. After the completion of the experimental research on genetically modified organisms, starting from the intermediate experimental stage, each subsequent stage of research and development must submit an application to the National Office for the Safety Management of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms, and after approval, the corresponding experiments can be carried out.
However, after obtaining the safety certificate, there is no relevant law or administrative regulations to guide how to apply for the corresponding genetically modified varieties.
This is true not only of genetically modified animals, but also of genetically modified crops, such as genetically modified rice, which could not be further applied for after obtaining a safety certificate in 2009.
Gene Agriculture Network: The Institute of Aquatic Sciences has achieved relevant results in the 1980s, what efforts have been made in the introduction of varieties in recent years, and what is the current progress?
Hu Wei: As early as 2000, the Institute of Aquatic Sciences took the lead in completing the pilot test of the whole fish growth hormone gene carp, and the pilot study showed that the growth rate of the whole fish growth hormone gene carp is fast and the bait conversion efficiency is high. Subsequently, we bred the homozygotes of the whole fish growth hormone gene carp, and once again carried out the pilot test of different whole fish growth hormone gene carp families, and further selected and bred the whole fish growth hormone gene carp family with excellent breeding traits and stable genetic traits.
In terms of food safety evaluation, according to the principle of substantive equivalence of transgenic food safety evaluation and according to the toxicological test specifications of national class I new drugs, the School of Basic Medical Sciences of Wuhan University and the Institute of Nutrition and Food Safety of the China Center for Disease Control and Prevention have respectively carried out strict food safety evaluations of the whole fish growth hormone gene carp, confirming that the whole fish growth hormone gene carp is substantially equivalent to the control carp, that is, the whole fish growth hormone gene carp and the control carp have the same food safety.
In terms of ecological safety evaluation, we systematically studied and evaluated the ecological safety of the whole fish growth hormone gene carp from different levels such as molecules, individuals, populations and communities, and found that the fecundity and viability of the whole fish growth hormone gene carp were lower than that of the control carp, so in the waters where the natural carp was distributed, the ecological risk of the whole fish growth hormone gene carp was even lower than that of the control carp.
Not only that, the Institute of Hydrobiology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences cooperated with Hunan Normal University to breed 100% sterile triploid to whole fish growth hormone gene carp through interplicitary hybridization. From a scientific point of view, the triploid whole fish growth hormone gene carp with edible safety, ecological safety, excellent traits and completely independent intellectual property rights has been industrially applied.
(The article is reproduced from the gene agriculture website, URL link: http://www.agrogene.cn/info-2896.shtml)
People's Daily News: Genetically modified salmon has been approved by the FDA
After more than 20 years of waiting, a genetically modified salmon called AquAdvantage finally received approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to enter the market on November 19. As the world's first transgenic animal to enter the consumer market, it encourages more genetically modified animal research that is waiting for the green light of policy. Although the accession of genetically modified salmon to the market is considered a milestone in the field of agricultural biotechnology, it still faces skepticism from all sides. In the context of people's increasingly vigilant attitudes towards genetically modified foods, genetically modified fish is still a long way from being accepted by the market. Although there is no "credible evidence" that GMOs are harmful to human health or the environment, according to the survey, only 37% of U.S. adults believe that GM foods are safe. Several major U.S. supermarket chains have pledged not to sell the genetically modified salmon.
"Unisexual sterile salmon"
AquAdvantage salmon is developed by ABTX Technologies (ABTX) in Massachusetts, USA. ABTX designed the first-generation prototype of AquAdvantage transgenic salmon as early as 1992 and has been investing in research and development ever since. The current AquAdvantage salmon is a gene implanted in the Genes of the Atlantic (600558, Stock Bar) Salmon, the growth hormone gene of the huge Chinook Salmon (King Salmon), and the Gene Switch of the Ocean Cod to maintain the activity of the implanted genes. As a result, the breeding period, which originally took two or three years, was shortened to 16-18 months.
ABTX was not the first developer of this type of genetically modified salmon. However, because the company has long been committed to the GM business, it has maintained contact and cooperation with the world's cutting-edge GM technology. Alison Van Eenennaam, who has served on the FDA's Veterinary Advisory Board, said ABTX's genetically modified salmon was originally developed by a team of scientists at Canada's public universities for more than 25 years.
It is worth mentioning that the president of ABTX, Elliott? Entis came to China in 2000 in hopes of collaborating with Chinese scientists on genetically modified fish, but later gave up because carp was not available in the United States. According to the surging news, China has always been at the forefront of the world in the scientific research of genetically modified fish. In 1984, the team of the Institute of Hydrobiology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences led by Zhu Zuoyan, an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, developed the world's first batch of transgenic fish, and then established a theoretical model of transgenic fish, constructed a recombinant growth hormone gene composed of carp and grass carp gene components, and bred a rapidly growing trans-"whole fish" gene Yellow River carp and sterile triploid "863 Ji carp".
Although ABTX's genetically modified fish technology was at the forefront of the world more than 20 years ago, it has not been able to bring the technology to market. ABTX began a dialogue with the FDA in the mid-1990s, and it was only in 2010 that the FDA completed a safety assessment and made an environmental impact determination at the end of 2012. LAURA Epstein, an FDA policy analyst, told THE TIMES that since it was the first time to approve such a GM category, the FDA hopes to "make sure everything is in order" and give the public the opportunity and space to comment. The FDA reviewed all relevant data and information submitted by ABTX up to July. According to its statement, experimental data show that after several generations of breeding, the transgenic salmon is still stable and meets the relevant safety and efficacy specifications, so the FDA believes that the fish can be provided to humans and animals for consumption.
In response to the environmental impact assessment, the FDA requires ABTX to require all genetically modified salmon to be unisexual and sterile to prevent such genetically modified salmon from accidentally mating and breeding with wild salmon and contaminating wild population genes. Meanwhile, U.S. authorities have only allowed the GM fish to be produced in Panama, while its eggs are manufactured in the Canadian province of Prince Edward Island. Due to the protection of land facilities in Panama and Canada, the chances of salmon escaping are very small, so there is no significant impact on the U.S. environment.
Lengthy application
For more than 20 years, genetically modified salmon has been in a gray area of U.S. policy, and the bioscience community and industry have complained about it for a long time. With no explanation for the delayed approval, other attempts to develop genetically modified animals as consumer products have gone unnoticed. As a result, the FDA's approval is a landmark decision that will revive an industry that has been waiting for a long green light for policy. Activist groups Friends of the Earth expect at least 35 other GM-engineered fish, as well as chickens, pigs and cattle, to be developed. The FDA's decision on salmon could set a precedent and make it easier for other genetically modified animals to market.
Fda approval may be related to the recent U.S. government re-evaluation of regulations on genetically engineered crops and animals. On July 2 of this year, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy said the United States would update crop and animal management regulations in 2016 that had been in place since 1992. On November 18, the U.S. Department of Agriculture met on how to revise existing genetic engineering guidelines to discuss preliminary plans. The key reason driving this series of discussions is that the U.S. government realizes that existing regulations may not be sufficient to cover crops and animals produced with cutting-edge technology.
However, after a long application "long run", the FDA's decision was surprising, and even ABTX felt abrupt. "There was no indication that this approval would come down so quickly before." Ronald Stotish, the company's chief executive, told the media. Ronald Stotish declined to disclose plans to market for genetically modified salmon, but for now there won't be much of this fish in the U.S. market, because Panama, the approved breeding site, can only produce a maximum of about 100 tonnes of salmon per year – a very small figure compared to the 200,000 tonnes of Atlantic salmon imported by the United States each year. If salmon are hatched or farmed elsewhere, the United States will need additional approval. According to the New York Times, according to documents filed by ABTX a year ago, they hope to build a farm on U.S. soil and add another one in Canada.
However, the challenges in the market are not optimistic. At present, the big supermarket Costco, supermarket chains Safeway and Whole Foods have all pledged not to sell genetically modified salmon. According to the Pew Research, only 37 percent of U.S. adults believe genetically modified foods are safe. Many consumers are willing to pay a higher price for brands that bear the label of "non-GMO.". Kelly Weikel, a food industry analyst at market research firm Technomic, said consumer acceptance and trust in genetically modified foods has been declining in recent years. More and more American consumers want to buy food that is "free of impurities," "additive-free," and "all-natural." The FDA also approved genetically modified apples and potatoes this year, but so far these produce (000061, stock bar) have not been widely sold in stores and restaurants.
In terms of sales, in addition to the United States, ABTX said it hopes to eventually sell such salmon to Canada, Argentina, Brazil and China. ABTX has applied to Health Canada for the sale of genetically modified salmon, and Health Canada recently confirmed that they are aware of the U.S. decision, but Canada's assessment is still ongoing.
"Frankenstein Fish"
Despite FDA approval, the emergence of genetically modified fish has caused a lot of opposition, with opponents calling it "Frankenstein fish." This is not surprising, in recent years, there have been voices of doubt about the safety of genetically modified foods. Transgenic salmon, as the first case of transgenic animals to enter the market, there is no precedent to verify, but also on the cusp of the storm.
American customers and environmental groups have made their positions opposing. Patty Lovera, assistant director of Food & Water Watch, said the group is in dialogue with members of Congress in hopes of aborting FDA approval. The group is also considering litigation to organize GM salmon entry into the market.
In addition to concerns about food safety, the environmental impact of genetically modified fish has also been questioned. Although the FDA has studied the environmental risks of AquAdvantage transgenic salmon when it analyzes it, opponents fear that such larger GM fish will be more competitive than wild salmon once they escape from fishing grounds, and it will be easier to snatch food and mates. "We don't think the existing measures are enough to prevent genes from genetically modified salmon from entering wild salmon. Once the pollution occurs, wild salmon will be permanently altered. It's going to be a huge biological experiment, and we're going to never be able to predict the consequences. Mark Butler, an activist at the Ecology Action Centre, said. The civil society group Center for Food Safety also pointed out that under special pressure, salmon may change their gender, and it is difficult to ensure that genetic pollution will never occur.
In addition, the FDA's EIA report on genetically modified salmon requires salmon to be produced and processed "outside" the United States, so that the threat to the U.S. environment is minimized, but the environmental risk assessment of Canada and Panama is lacking. Joe Perry, former president of the European Food Safety Authority, said european regulators would demand more data than the FDA would demand for similar GM salmon projects.
However, there are also groups that are strongly supporting the FDA's decision. In 2014, 80 scientists and life science industry executives in the United States sent a joint letter to Obama, asking the U.S. government to support the marketing of genetically modified salmon. "Relying on catching wild salmon as a food source is difficult to sustain, and marine fish have been overfished." William Muir, a professor of genetics at Purdue University, said there is no "credible evidence" that GMOs are harmful to human health or the environment.
Academician Zhu Zuoyan: Why are you not afraid of hybridization but afraid of genetically modified organisms
https://wiki.antpedia.com/n-1322853-news
Hearing the proposal to "open a Weibo or WeChat public account to talk about genetically modified organisms", some scientists looked pale.
In their view, this approach may be effective for ordinary scientific problems, but if you talk about GMOs, you may be embarrassed.
That doubt may change in 2016. The Central Document No. 1, issued in January, proposes that agricultural transgenic technologies should be "carefully promoted on the basis of ensuring safety." On April 13, the Ministry of Agriculture held a special conference on genetically modified organisms, reiterating that the development of genetically modified organisms is a major strategic decision made by the Party Central Committee and the State Council.
These will profoundly affect the direction of the GMO public opinion field.
Why aren't you afraid of hybridization but afraid of GMOs?
In the face of popular science objects, Zhu Zuoyan, a researcher at the Institute of Hydrobiology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, a professor at the School of Life Sciences of Peking University, and an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, started from the nucleus of the cell and tried to "talk in detail".
The chromosomes in the nucleus store genetic material, and the genes are distributed on them. Genes are genetic codes, and the genetic information carried guides the synthesis of a certain protein, thereby controlling the performance of traits in individual organisms.
If you think of the gene as a line, then the real code is only part of it, the first paragraph is responsible for the code start, it is the engine, and the next paragraph is responsible for stopping and braking.
The transgenic Yellow River carp studied by Zhu Zuoyan is "through genetic cloning, the coding sequence in the middle of the grass carp growth hormone gene is taken out, and a section of the carp's own start and stop sequences is connected to both sides and introduced into the fertilized eggs of the carp."
Grass carp grows fast, through the above transgenic operations, so that the transgenic carp grow into 2 to 3 pounds can be marketed time, from the ordinary carp needed for two years to a year, or even seven or eight months.
"If grass carp and carp are hybridized, it is the whole set of genes of the grass carp and the whole set of genes of the carp that are mixed together. As soon as I heard about the hybridization, everyone felt that there was no doubt and could eat. Zhu Zuoyan told the "Lookout Oriental Weekly", "And what we did was just put one of the genes of grass carp together with the carp, which led to a lot of questions." ”
In fact, as early as 1984, Zhu Zuoyan's team had shortened the growth cycle of crucian carp by reorganizing human growth genes and transferring them to loach, goldfish, crucian carp, carp, etc.
But after all, it is borrowed from human genes. "If it is all fish genes, not genes of other species or bacteria, it is relatively easy for ordinary people to understand and accept." Zhu Zuoyan said.
However, in the eyes of scientists, the biggest advantage of GMOs is precisely that they can cross species.
Insulin, now known as the control of diabetes, is the world's first commercially used genetically modified product produced by genetically modified microorganisms, approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1982.
In the field of agriculture where transgenic technology is widely used, the research on genetically modified crops is the fastest developing. Among them, the earliest insect-resistant and herbicide-resistant crops that have reached the commercial stage are to transfer the bacterial insect-resistant genes and herbicide-tolerant genes into the genome of plants: the genes of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) are transferred into cotton, corn, rice and other plants to make them insect-resistant; the herbicide-tolerant EPSPS gene is transferred to soybeans and other crops to make them resistant to herbicides.
Prior to the development of transgenic technology, traditional breeding was always carried out within and between closely related species. However, the breeding process is long and may not be able to go down. For example, mules produced by the hybridization of horses and donkeys are a successful example of the heterosis, but mules cannot reproduce.
Transgenes, on the other hand, have achieved artificial selection of excellent genes and excellent traits of cross-species aggregation. It breaks down the species barrier, expands the available genetic resources, improves the efficiency of selection, and makes the breeding process more efficient.
Insecticide does not kill?
In the Central Plains, many people have fragments of "cotton bollworms" in their childhood memories - when the cotton fruit first grows, it is a small ball of green and tender, called a cotton bell, and the cotton bollworm drills in and eats all the tender fibers inside, and the medicine sprayed from the outside can not help it. Many places have mobilized primary school students to go down to the fields and pick up insects with their bare hands.
The insecticidal protein gene of Bt bacteria is transferred to the genome of plants such as cotton, corn, and rice, and Bt insecticidal protein is produced after its expression. The pests feed and die, and the plants defend themselves.
And this has led to speculation: bugs will die when they eat them, let alone people?
In fact, only after the target pest ingests the Bt protein in the genetically modified crop, under the action of the intestinal environment and specific proteases, the active protein dissolved from the Bt protein binds to the receptor of the epidermal membrane of the pest's midgut, forming a specific perforation, and the pest dies of midgut paralysis. Other non-target insects do not have this process and are not killed.
There is no corresponding receptor in the human body, which cannot bind to the Bt protein, so it will not be "tricked".
The above speculation has become a rumor.
At present, the domestic GM cotton planting range is 95%-98%. Some scientists said that it is generally estimated that Bt genetically modified crops can reduce the use of pesticide chemical pesticides by 50%, significantly reducing the impact of pesticides on crops and the environment.
Nowadays, rice seems to be caught in the original cotton insect prevention dilemma - two borers, three borers, rice planthoppers, pesticides sprayed on it, but pests can not be killed.
Dr. Zhu Zhen, a researcher at the Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, which studies transgenic insect-resistant rice, told Oriental Weekly that if genetically modified rice is promoted, the pesticide market will be greatly impacted.
Before the development of transgenic technology, agricultural pest control methods can be roughly divided into two types: chemical pesticides and biological control.
Common organophosphorus pesticides and carbamate pesticides can paralyze the nervous system of insects, causing poisoning and death. This insecticidal mechanism is the same for animals and humans, and may lead to poisoning and death.
Biological control has spawned two industries: one is to raise natural enemy insects, such as raising red-eyed bees for corn borers, but natural enemy insects must be synchronized with the growth time of pests, so the actual operation is not convenient; the second is biological insecticides, the most commonly used is Bt bacteria, its disadvantage is that sun exposure, wind and rain will make it quickly lose activity, and the cost will increase significantly.
Genetically modified Bt insect-resistant crops, unlike traditional agricultural insect control methods, are the means for plants to protect themselves.
"The reduction in the cost of agricultural production is beneficial to agricultural production, which also means that the cost of every consumer in society is reduced, and the reduction of chemical pesticides is also conducive to environmental improvement, and everyone is a beneficiary." Zhu Zhen said.
Is GM technology a panacea?
"Transgenic technology can control pests and diseases, increase production, and is an effective and safe technology. But that doesn't mean that GMO technology is a panacea. Wang Dayuan, former director of the Department of Bioengineering of the Rice Institute of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, told Oriental Weekly.
For insect-resistant GM crops, pests also develop resistance. For example, if a transgenic cotton is planted, the vast majority of sensitive bollworms die of poisoning, and there may still be one in 10,000 resistant individuals left, and their breeding offspring will develop resistance.
To this end, 20 years ago, the U.S. government required that the planting ratio of genetically modified insect-resistant cotton be controlled at 80%, and the remaining 20% planted ordinary cotton, so that the cotton bollworms that survive on ordinary cotton do not carry resistance genes, and the cotton bollworms that carry resistance genes are combined, and the offspring are not resistant and can be killed by Bt genetically modified cotton.
It is difficult to implement such management among Chinese farmers: who wants to bear the loss of the 20% of ordinary cotton? However, at present, the only commercially grown genetically modified crops in the mainland are Bt insect-resistant cotton and virus-resistant papaya. As a result, resistant cotton bollworms that grow in cotton fields may be diluted by non-resistant populations in corn fields and unable to form resistant populations.
In fact, GM cotton has been planted for 20 years, and now the resistance level of bollworms to Bt transgenic cotton is still very low.
Regulation and safety are the same thing?
The GM controversy has been going on for years, and the misunderstandings have focused on the so-called GMO staple food and regulatory opacity. But this has nothing to do with the safety of the nature of GMOs.
In fact, since the promulgation of the Regulations on the Safety Management of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms in 2001, the official safety evaluation process has not been concealed.
In 2013, in accordance with the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Open Government Information, the Ministry of Agriculture proactively disclosed the relevant laws, regulations, safety evaluation standards, guidelines, testing agencies, work rules of the Safety Committee and the list of members of agricultural genetically modified organisms in the "Authoritative Concerns about Genetically Modified Organisms" column of the official website "Hot Topics". At the same time, in accordance with the application of individual citizens, government information related to the safety management of agricultural genetically modified organisms was disclosed in accordance with the law.
At the press conference of the Ministry of Agriculture on April 13, Wu Kongming, academician of the Chinese Academy of Engineering and chairman of the National Agricultural Genetically Modified Organism Safety Committee, said: "Now the international evaluation of genetically modified organisms is basically two models, the American model is to evaluate the product, the EU model is to evaluate the technical process, and China not only evaluates the product, but also evaluates the process, in addition to adding indicators such as rat three-generation breeding test and rice heavy metal content analysis, from this point of view, the mainland evaluation system is the most stringent in the world." ”
"A country's GMO approval process and testing mechanism are discussed and decided by experts in various relevant fields, not by one expert." Wang Dayuan said that this process is so complex that some scientists may not be able to understand it all.
As for the illegal cultivation and supervision questioned by the reversal people, Huang Dafang, a researcher at the Institute of Biotechnology of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, told the Oriental Weekly: "The provisions of the current law are two steps, genetically modified crops, one is to get a safety certificate, and the other is to pass the variety examination." If the variety examination has not yet passed, it is illegal to sell and plant. But it's not because GMOs aren't safe. The two concepts should not be confused. ”
This conceptual confusion is manifested in the "Golden Rice Incident" in 2008.
"The purpose of Golden Rice is to combat vitamin A deficiency." Chen Xiaoya, an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and a researcher at the Institute of Plant Physiology and Ecology of the Shanghai Institute of Biological Sciences of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, told The Oriental Weekly, "The problem is that the experiment was not declared to the relevant domestic institutions in accordance with the provisions of the State Council's Regulations on the Safety Management of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms, and the situation was not fully explained to the children and parents of the subjects." But the rice itself is safe. ”
What worries are coming from the outside?
"GMOs were originally a technical problem." Huang Dafang felt that it was normal for people to have doubts at the beginning.
"This worry comes from the outside." Zhu Zuoyan told this reporter that similar voices also appeared when the United States and other Western countries began to commercially grow GMOs.
There are at least four opposing forces abroad:
One is extreme environmentalists, who believe that destroying species diversity is harmful to the environment;
The second is religious people, who believe that god can only create all things, and human beings cannot easily change;
The third is the trade war, especially seen in Western Europe's agricultural trade barriers to North America - 70% to 80% of the food in the United States contain GMOs, and only by not accepting GMOs in Western Europe can we prevent US agricultural products from entering the region;
The fourth is the old interest groups, such as the original wild salmon from the ocean fishing, after artificial breeding, salmon prices have been pulled down, by the traditional fishing groups opposed and boycotted. Their reasons include that breeding inbreeding of farmed fish causes a loss of heritability, and that hybridization of farmed fish with wild salmon destroys the heritability of wild populations.
Greenpeace
"In fact, genetic mutations occur every day in nature, which is greater than the probability of mutations that transgenes may bring." Zhu Zuoyan said, "People who really understand genetics think that these are all perversions, but the public may not all recognize them." ”
In early 1986, Wang Daheng, Shi Changxu and four other members of the Chinese Academy of Sciences wrote to Deng Xiaoping proposing the development of high technology, later known as the "863 Plan." Research on genetically modified crops in China is growing rapidly with the support of this program. In 1988, China also became the first country in the world to commercialize genetically modified crops due to the commercialization of antiviral genetically modified tobacco.
"At that time, everyone thought it was a good thing, and 'genetically modified' was still used as a selling point." Zhu Zhen said. In 2008, the State Council approved the establishment of the "Major Science and Technology Project for the Cultivation of New Varieties of Genetically Modified Organisms", which as the only project in the agricultural field, was included in the 16 medium- and long-term major scientific and technological projects of the country together with large aircraft manufacturing, and planned to invest 24 billion yuan in 15 years, becoming the agricultural science and technology project with the largest investment in history.
Where does the illusory horror come from?
However, "the wind direction changed all at once." Huang Dafang said.
On August 17, 2009, the Ministry of Agriculture approved the production and application safety certificates of transgenic insect-resistant rice "Huahui No. 1" and "Bt Shanyou 63" and transnase gene corn "BVLA430101" in accordance with the law. In October of the same year, these three crops appeared in the "Approval List of the Second Batch of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organism Safety Certificates in 2009" published by the China Biosafety Network.
This means that on the basis of a large number of experiments and tests by scientists, the government recognizes that these genetically modified crops have no safety problems and can promote their industrialization.
That's when Greenpeace stepped in.
"China wants to industrialize genetically modified rice? This has a big impact, and it will definitely block you! Huang Dafang said.
The information that the scientists had was, "At that time, the other side had a four-step strategy: first, we must not industrialize genetically modified rice; second, we must discredit scientists; third, we must restrain the upper-level decision-making; and fourth, we must overthrow the major agricultural GM projects." ”
The specific means is to stir up media speculation and move the so-called international controversies into China.
Originally, "HuaHui No. 1" and "Bt Shanyou 63" were transferred to the Bt insecticidal protein gene, which could only kill lepidopteran insects such as borers and rice longitudinal leaf borers, and would not cause harm to the human body. Under the hype, in the description of genetically modified crops, it is not uncommon to see horrors such as "cutting off children and grandchildren", "causing cancer and causing disease", and "China has become the first guinea pig for international capital to promote genetically modified products".
Huang Dafang felt that "genetically modified organisms are demonized." He believes that "some people have taken advantage of the ignorance of ordinary people to create an illusory terror." ”
He said that in addition to the "national science and technology major project for the cultivation of new varieties of genetically modified organisms" that has not been changed by scientists' arguments, the other three steps have been achieved: although genetically modified rice is safe, it cannot be industrialized, decisions are contained, and scientists are smeared.
Today it was explained, clarified, and then it came out again every once in a while, and it came out one after another – this is the helplessness that scientists generally express.
Why is "low flash point, hot spots"?
As the chairman of the agricultural biotechnology science communication platform, Dr. Zhu Zhen frankly said that "this kind of problem should be carefully handled", especially at the moment, "some people's emotions are very easily stimulated, the flash point is very low, and there are many hot spots".
He reflected: "In fact, our public awareness needs to be raised - scientists apply for funding from the Ministry of Science and Technology, publish articles, submit reports to the Ministry of Science and Technology, and it seems that the work is completed." The relevant departments also attach importance to the establishment of project allocations, and do not see the impact of the social reaction on the project. ”
The accounting for the public has long been done abroad.
Zhu Zhen said that in 2001, he visited Brazil to visit the dna sequence testing work of bacteria, and his project report included publicity and reporting to entrepreneurs, the media, the government and the public. Even in those days when networks were less developed, projects had to build electronic, cross-time zone platforms to solve this problem. "Very thoughtful."
In Europe, large-scale scientific projects must form a "big communication" with the media, communities, people, etc. "The project has not completed this step, it cannot even be accepted, and it does not count no matter how well it is done." Zhu Zhen also suggested the establishment of a risk education committee, "not only 'science popularization', but 'science communication'." You see the 2013 Shenzhou 10 female astronaut Wang Yaping space teaching, it is doing a good job! ”
Huang Dafang, an academician of the Chinese Academy of Engineering, an expert in corn genetics and breeding, and a professor at China Agricultural University, interviewed citizens who opposed genetic modification at the request of the Ministry of Agriculture. The three deputies are ordinary people, including the former chairman of the trade union of a semiconductor factory and a female textile worker.
The two old experts started from the beginning, combing one by one, what is the transgenic, what is Bt, what is the difference with chemical pesticides, and so on.
As we chatted, the union chairman said, "You have a point, or when will you be invited to come to us and talk to our buddies?" ”
In Chen Xiaoya's science popularization work, he often encounters some strange questions, such as "will the children born of genetically modified organisms be deformed"; there are also primary school students who are whimsical and "will they grow wings". After explaining, "Most people's trust in science gradually increases in the process of communication. ”
Let science return to science
In reality, not the majority of scientists are willing to stand up to the public.
In November 2010, Zhang Qi, director of the State Key Laboratory of Crop Genetic Improvement of Huazhong Agricultural University, which studied "Huahui No. 1" and "Bt Shanyou 63", gave a speech on the topic of "Rice Functional Genome and Crop Genetic Improvement" at China Agricultural University, and someone at the scene shouted: "Zhang Qiqi is a traitor!" "Accuse him of using Chinese as a guinea pig, and even more so, he directly grabbed the porcelain teacup in the front row and smashed it."
Today, the lab is faced with various interview requests, but only very politely repeatedly on the other end of the phone to apologize: "Sorry, we don't make any remarks." ”
"Some reversal people who do not understand biotechnology have set off the world's largest reversal activity in China, and put on the hats of 'traitors' and 'traitors' to scientific and technological personnel engaged in the cause of genetically modified organisms." Wang Dayuan said.
"We also know that this is an attack out of thin air. But scientists are hard and busy with topics in their daily lives, and although science popularization is also a job, they will be scolded as soon as they engage in science popularization, so why bother? He said.
In this context, the Agricultural Biotechnology Science Communication Platform was conceived in 2013. One is to call on scientists to stand up and speak out; the other is to use this platform to communicate and interact with the media and the public to solve doubts and doubts.
At present, the virtual platform has attracted more than 30 scientists and often holds seminars such as agricultural biotechnology science communication and risk exchange.
A few days ago, a student of Huang Dafang, who was already a researcher, came to him to ask for some genetically modified materials, and he wanted to go to the Dongcheng District Teachers' Training School in Beijing to give a lecture to the middle school biology teacher. This made Huang Dafang very pleased.
However, in his view, the scientific publicity to prove the safety of genetically modified organisms is not a panacea, and it is urgent to "take a step forward" - to promote industrialization.
"If GM crops can be promoted to industry, they can really solve our food security problems." Otherwise, once there is a wind and grass, grain harvest failure, and international grain prices soar, you are passive, and soybeans are an example. Huang Dafang said.
In 2015, China imported 81.69 million tons of soybeans, a record high, which greatly suppressed the domestic soybean market price. "The oil yield of imported genetically modified soybeans is 19%, while the domestically grown soybeans are non-GMO, and the oil yield is 16%, so domestic oil mills are less willing to buy domestic non-GMO soybeans." Wang Dayuan said.
Huang Dafang told this reporter: "We constantly call for corn not to become the second soybean. ”
More than one scientist said that strictly speaking, genetically modified technology products are high-tech products that are highly related to the industry, and must be pulled by the market before the chain can operate. Imported genetically modified products are equivalent to spending Chinese money to pull other people's genetically modified technology industries, while our own wheels do not turn.
Huang Dafang, a researcher at the Institute of Biotechnology of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences
"People in the scientific community who really do life sciences, especially molecular biology, understand this matter, and there is no objection." However, people in the scientific community who do not engage in this profession are also interlaced like mountains. Zhu Zuoyan said, "Whether GMOs are safe or not, scientists and experts must have the final say, and they cannot engage in public opinion polls." ”
"Bring science back to science." Huang Dafang sighed, "This sentence is particularly important at present. ”