One area that seems to bring a high level of comment is potential allergenicity. The concern is that the gene that invokes an allergic reaction may be inserted into a food. The allergic person can easily avoid the original product but wouldn't know that another food could contain the problem gene so wouldn't know to avoid it. For example, there is a gene that is found in some fish species that live in the upper Atlantic (in very cold water) that has been inserted into tomatoes. The gene gives to the tomato the ability to withstand colder temperature than normal. Fish is one of the top 8 allergenic foods in the United States; for the person allergic to fish it is easy to identify foods to avoid. But, if the gene that has been inserted into the tomato is the one responsible for creating the protein that the person is allergic to, it is very difficult for the allergic person to know to avoid that particular brand or packer of tomatoes. This is the crux of the anti-g m argument as it deals with allergenicity.

This does bring up another argument. If a gene from an animal (any kind - beef, poultry, pork, fish, etc) is inserted into a plant, does this mean that a vegetarian cannot or will not eat the plant item now? This is a real issue among the vegetarian community. In general, this community desires less rather than more scientific manipulation of the food supply.

Another concern is the development of a few super strains of plants with the eventual elimination of other strains - sort of the development of an endangered list for plants. This would cause a strain on the soil for the nutrients needed for these super plants. Biodiversity would diminish which is not healthy for the environment.

And one final thing I will mention is that, under current labeling rules of the United States, g m foods do not carry any kind of identifying label. So, the general public would not realize that the product is the result of genetic modification. Is it necessary for them to know this? The answer to that question generally revolves around the perceived safety of g m foods of the responder.

I suspect that the real truth lies somewhere between the two extremes of opinion that are being shouted right now. I believe that g m foods are safe but that we should keep a vigilent eye out to make sure it remains safe.

Here are a couple of web sites where you can get more information.

• http://warp.nal.usda.gov:80/bic/ - the Biotechnology Informtion Center of the USDA
• http://www.bio.org/welcome.htm. - the Biotechnology Industry Organization
• http://www.fao.org/es/esn/ biotech/TABCONTS.HTM - the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Thanks for an interesting question.

Jill Irvin, RD
The Ohio State University

source: Food Biotechnology: Can You Answer these Consumer Questions? Jodie Shield, M.Ed., RD