| T1 |
Genetics to change nutritional composition
– the golden rice
|
|
Contribution from: Ingo Potrykus, Professor, ETH Zentrum,
Switzerland
 Ingo Potrykus
is a professor emeritus in plant sciences at the Swiss Federal Institute
of Technology Zurich. He is also Chairman of the Humanitarian Golden Rice
Board and Humanitarian Golden Rice Network. Professor Potrykus is dedicated
to use the potential of genetic engineering technology to reduction of
malnutrition in developing countries.
Source: http://www.science-generation.nu/anmalan/shorttexts.doc
Abstract:
(Source: http://www.science-generation.nu/anmalan/Abstracts.doc)
Vitamin A-malnutrition is a severe medical problem: to date 500 000
children per year become blind and 6 000 per day die from vitamin A-deficiency,
despite massive investment into traditional interventions. Biofortification
(genetic improvement of the nutritional quality) would offer a sustainable,
cost-effective, and alternative contribution. For rice and provitamin A
this requires use of genetic engineering technology. Transgenic provitamin
A-rice, with the potential to reduce vitamin A-malnutrition substantially,
is a scientific reality since 1999. It is available to developing countries,
free of charge and limitations, via a humanitarian project. Despite continuous
efforts of a Humanitarian Golden Rice Board and Network, to make available
to subsistence farmers in developing countries, locally adapted Golden
Rice varieties, the project may take further five years until the first
seeds will be in the hands of the farmers. Why?
GMO-regulations have reached a state far beyond the capacity of humanitarian
or public goods R&D. Despite the fact e.g. that no ecologist has been
able to construct any hypothetical ecological risk from Golden Rice to
any environment, the project is still awaiting the first permission for
field testing in a developing country. Considering the history of any crop
variety in use in agriculture (including organic agriculture) it is difficult
not to recognize that all these plants - and consequently all our food
- is most extensively “genetically modified”, with most severe and “unpredictable
genome alterations”. GMO’s are, in comparison, precisely and predictably
“genetically engineered”. Despite the fact that it is common scientific
knowledge, that there are no unusual inherent risks connected to GMO’s
, their use to the benefit of the poor is withheld for ideological reasons
and because of “unpredictable genome alterations!”. The example of humanitarian
Golden Rice exemplifies that this European attitude is immoral because
it leads to unnecessary suffering and death of millions of children.
Suggested Reading (available on the web):
(1) Experience
from the Humanitarian Golden Rice Project: Extreme Precautionary Regulation
Prevents Use of Green Biotechnology in Public Projects (2004)
(2) Golden Rice. Ag BioTech InfoNet website http://www.biotech-info.net/golden.html
|
| T2 |
GMO and risk assessment
|
|
Contribution from: Philip J. Dale, Professor, Department
of Crop Genetics, John Innes Centre, United Kingdom
 Professor
Philip Dale is Leader of the Genetic Modification and Biosafety Research
Group at the John Innes Centre, Norwich, UK. He worked in agriculture for
several years before graduating in Agricultural Botany and obtaining a
doctorate in Plant Genetics. As Research Group Leader at the Plant Breeding
Institute, Cambridge he was involved in the first field experiments with
GM crops in the UK and led several UK EU research programmes on the biosafety
assessment of GM crops. He has been a member of the UK Advisory Committee
on Releases to the Environment (ACRE) and the UK Advisory Committee on
Novel Foods and Processes. In 2000 he joined the newly formed Agriculture
and Environment Biotechnology Commission, to provide the UK Government
with independent strategic advice on developments in biotechnology and
their implications for agriculture and the environment. He was a member
of the GM Public Debate Steering Board, the GM Science Review Pane and
advised the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit on GM crops.
Source: http://www.science-generation.nu/anmalan/shorttexts.doc
Abstract:
(Source: http://www.science-generation.nu/anmalan/Abstracts.doc)
Methods of improving crops have been developed over the past century.
A range of approaches is now used for different purposes. Over the
last 20 years scientists have learned how to isolate genes and gene switches
(DNA) from different organisms (microbes, plants and animals). They
have also managed to introduce those genes into a range of crop plants.
Genetic modification of various kinds has been practiced over many decades,
but with this latest development in genetic modification, there is widespread
scientific that there should be a more comprehensive risk assessment than
has been carried in earlier, more traditional approaches to crop improvement.
A wide range of questions must be answered in assessing the risks of
growing genetically modified crops and other organisms, including: the
effect of the introduced gene on the modified organism (GMO), whether it
is safe for the GMO or its products to be eaten by people or animals, and
whether there are any undesirable effects on the environment etc.
It is not possible to make any general judgements about the safety of GMOs
compared with similar non-GMOs. Each organism needs to be assessed
individually and independent judgements made on the safety of each
LInks to articles:
(1) Genes
and chemicals in food & environment.
http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/bi430-fs430/recent.htm |
| T3 |
The use of DNA as evidence in criminal
cases
|
|
Contribution from: Marie Allen, Assistant Professor,
Uppsala University, Sweden
Marie Allen has a PhD from Uppsala University, the departments of Medical
Genetics and Forensic Medicine. She did her post doc at F. Hoffmann-La
Roche Ltd in California and has since her return to Sweden worked with
Forensic Genetics at the department of Genetics and Pathology at Uppsala
University. Her research is focused on forensic DNA technology development.
A general aim is to obtain rapid, sensitive and highly discriminating DNA
tests for criminal casework samples. New sensitive techniques can also
be used to analyse degraded historical samples to answer biohistorical
questions.
Source: http://www.science-generation.nu/anmalan/shorttexts.doc
Abstract:
DNA analysis has become a widespread and useful tool in criminal investigations
during the past decades. Forensic DNA analysis is commonly used to link
suspects to a crime scene but it can also be very valuable in individual
identification in mass disasters, terrorist attacks, war or missing person
cases. Furthermore, familial relationships, as paternity, maternity or
relationships over several generations can be investigated. Although the
development in DNA typing technology has been very rapid, further developments
are needed to enhance the sensitivity and the throughput in the analysis.
Routine forensic DNA analysis is performed using markers varying in length
between individuals in the nuclear genome. However, when the DNA amounts
are very limited or highly degraded, a DNA analysis might only be possible
using mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). Mitochondrial DNA is maternally inherited
and exists in approximately 1000 copies per cell. The multi copy feature
of mtDNA makes it particularly useful in forensic investigations when nuclear
DNA analysis fails. In this presentation an overview over routine forensic
DNA analysis, future technology developments and future perspectives will
be given.
Source: http://www.science-generation.nu/anmalan/Abstracts.doc |
| T4 |
Vision of future biotech applications
|
|
Contribution by: Mathias Uhlén, Professor, Royal Institute
of Technology, Sweden
 Mathias
Uhlén is Professor of Microbiology at the Royal Institute of Technology
(KTH), Stockholm, Sweden. Dr Uhlén is member of the Royal Swedish
Academy of Engineering Science (IVA), the Royal Swedish Academy of Science
(KVA) and the European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO). He has more
than 250 original research publications, which covers fields such as genomics,
production of recombinant proteins, protein engineering, protein design
and bioautomation. He has co-founded several biotech companies based on
his research, including Pyrosequencing (now Biotage), Affibody and SweTree
Technologies. He has received several awards for his research, including
The Svedberg Prize, The KVA Göran Gustafsson Prize, the Pierce Prize,
The IVA Gold Medal and the Serafimer Medal.
Source: http://www.science-generation.nu/anmalan/shorttexts.doc
Abstract:
The modern era of biotechnology started in the 70:ies with several
technical break-throughs, such as gene cloning, hybridoma technology, DNA
sequencing and synthesis. These inventions, of which many were awarded
the Nobel prize, led to powerful technologies to develop new products and
applications based on biotechnology. The 80:ies saw the first generation
of such products on the market and the birth of many biotech companies.
In the 90:ies and up to today, a vast amount of applications in many fields
have been developed and this has been complemented with an overwhelming
expansion of our knowledge-base in bioscience, including the deciphering
of the human genome as well as genomes from many other species. At present,
approximately 200 genes in average are being published in the public domain
every day. In addition, new technical improvements has been made, for example
in fields such as stem cell research, transgenetic research, nanotechnology,
microfluidics, systems biology and high-throughput protein research (proteomics)
. The challenge for the future of biotechnology is to use the increased
knowledge-base and the new technologies to develop useful new products
both in medicine and in other areas such as agriculture, forestry and environment.
Some possible visions for new applications and future developments will
be discussed.
Source: http://www.science-generation.nu/anmalan/Abstracts.doc |
|