Photos by JANA SUMMERS An Thai Bui, a
post-doctorate student in molecular biology, performs a genetic
engineering experiment.
By Sharon Kim
Daily Bruin Contributor
Chances are, Americans are regularly consuming foods that have
been genetically engineered without their knowledge.
According to Julie Miles, the Safe Foods Campaign Coordinator at
the California Public Interest Group, 60 to 70 percent of all
processed foods contain genetically engineered ingredients.
“People should just not assume that GE foods are
completely safe,” Miles said. “Currently, GE foods are
not subject to the same standards or safety requirements as other
food products are.”
According to Miles, the most common GE crops are corn and
soybeans, which are both widely used in the form of corn oil, corn
syrup, soybean oil, soy lecithin and other products.
Genetic engineering of food generally involves the process of
combining genes to produce effects that would normally occur in
nature. For example, the injection of Bovine Growth Hormone to cows
will increase their output of milk.
Last fall, taco shells served at the Taco Bell restaurant on
campus were suspected of containing GE corn unfit for human
consumption.
Although it was later found that only the taco shells sold in
grocery stores were harmful, the incident helped raise awareness of
GE food at UCLA.
“At this point we do not have a policy regarding the
purchase of genetically engineered food,” said Associated
Students of UCLA Director of Food Operations Robert Williams in a
statement. “However, we did not and are not selling the Taco
Bell taco shells that were in question.”
He added that ASUCLA has made sure that on-campus food vendors
are using “non-genetically enhanced” corn chips in
their products.
The uncertainty of whether GE foods are as harmless as selective
breeding or hybridization, which does not involve has led CalPIRG
to call for a moratorium on the use of GE foods, according to
Miles.
The group wants to wait until the GE industry can provide
adequate proof that modified foods are safe to consume.
“If GE products are proven safe, there should be labeling
of whether a product contains GE ingredients so that people can
have the choice of whether they want to buy the product or
not,” Miles said.
But microbiology and molecular genetics Professor Jeffrey H.
Miller does not think labeling GE foods would be a good idea.
“Given the current hyped-up fears about GE foods and the
stigmatization of them being evil, labeling will only result in
people being scared off from buying GE products simply of the words
“˜genetically engineered,'” he said.
Miller added that genetic modification is merely another way to
prepare food. Food should be labeled not according to the way it is
processed but according to how safe the product is, he said.
This job of assessing safety, Miller continued, remains the Food
and Drug Administration’s responsibility.
First-year biology student Jay Won (left)
assists An Thai Bui in a lab in Life Science 2836.
Currently, the FDA Web site does not indicate any requirements for
labeling GE foods.
According to Miles, CalPIRG is concerned with potential
environmental concerns and health risks GE foods pose, such as
increased risk of cancer, allergies, antibiotic resistance and
toxins.
“Since genetic engineering involves the creation of new
organisms that people have never consumed, there is no knowing what
our response will be,” she said.
Microbiology and molecular biology Professor Jake Lusis said the
growing alarm toward GE foods is mainly due to what he termed
“paranoia.”
“People are suspicious of altered products, so it’s
easy to raise fears,” he said. “There is probably a lot
of exaggeration going on, and the whole thing seems more of a
political issue than a scientific one.”
According to Miles, GE foods were first widely commercialized in
the US in 1996. By 1999, there were more than 98 million acres of
GE crops, with more than 70 million of these acres in the U.S.
Despite what seems to be an American dominance in production of
genetically modified crops, there is more exposure of issues
concerning GE food in European countries than in the U.S.
“This is because Europeans have had some scares with their
food, such as with the mad cow and hoof and mouth diseases, making
them more sensitized to potential dangers in their food,”
Miles said.
“Also, the biotech companies are more powerful in the
U.S., and they are very conscious and concerned over how Americans
react to their products,” she added. “They’ve
been pretty smart and careful about rolling out GE technology
without drawing much attention.”
Several students said they do not really worry about whether GE
foods are safe or not because of the lack of the widespread use of
the products.
“I don’t think (GE foods) are really prevalent
yet,” said third-year English student Sarah Peters.
“And people probably wouldn’t know the difference
anyway.”
Without knowing for sure whether certain foods contain GE
ingredients, consumers may find the task to completely avoid
modified foods difficult.
One of the safest ways to avoid buying GE-enhanced products
might be to turn to organically-grown foods, which are generally
more expensive.
To a scientist, however, the health problems caused by eating
some traditional foods, such as preservatives and chemicals in a
chocolate bar, can be more of a risk than eating GE food.
“As a geneticists and biochemist,” Miller said,
“I think we eat more things everyday that can be more harmful
than GE food.”
Pros and Cons of Genetic Engineering in Food
SOURCE: www.calPIRG.org,
www.CONSECOL.org Original
graphic by VICTOR CHEN/Daily Bruin Web adaptation by MIKE
OUYANG/Daily Bruin