QCan you give me some peer reviewed references that discuss the health effects of the various proteins expressed in Bt corn. In particular quoting Syngenta's website, Syngenta's Attribute II is supposedly active against Beet Armyworm (Spodoptera exigua),

Can you give me some peer reviewed references that discuss the health effects of the various proteins expressed in Bt corn. In particular quoting Syngenta's website, Syngenta's Attribute II is supposedly active against Beet Armyworm (Spodoptera exigua), Black Cutworm(Agrotis ipsilon), Common Stalk Borer(Papaipema nebris), Corn Earworm(Helicoverpa zea), Dingy Cutworm(Feltia jaculifera), European Corn Borer(Ostrinia nubilalis), Fall Armyworm(Spodoptera frugiperda), Southern Cornstalk Borer(Diatraea crambidoides), Southwestern Corn Borer(Diatraea grandiosella), Sugarcane Borer(Diatraea saccharalis), and Western Bean Cutworm(Striacosta albi). Has there been any long term studies of Attribute II's health effects?

AExpert Answer

Attribute II sweet corn expresses the vegetative insecticidal protein Vip3A and the crystalline protein Cry1Ab, both of which are derived from the naturally occurring soil microorganism Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt).  Bt spores and proteins have been used worldwide for many decades in both organic and conventional farming as a direct application pesticide for vegetable and fruit crops, and thus there is a long history of safe use and exposure.  Both of these proteins are highly selective in terms of their toxicity because they bind to specific receptors that are found in the midgut of certain insect species, but not found in other insects or vertebrate animals.  These two proteins are therefore only toxic to the larvae (caterpillars) of certain Lepidopteran insects that are key agricultural pests, but are harmless to other insects, fish, reptiles, birds and mammals, including humans.  Here is a recent article that discusses the safety of Bt proteins that you may find useful:

 

Hammond B.G. and Koch M.S. (2012). A Review of the Food Safety of Bt Crops, In: Bacillus thuringiensis Biotechnology, E. Sansinenea (ed.). Springer: New York. Pp. 305-325.

 

To answer your second question, long term studies have not been conducted of Attribute II, nor are they necessary.  Attribute II expresses transgenic proteins which have been demonstrated to be: 1) rapidly digestible by humans as other dietary proteins, 2) denatured and inactivated by heat (as from cooking), and 3) completely nontoxic in laboratory mice and rats exposed to levels many hundreds of times higher than humans could possibly be exposed to.  As these proteins are easily digested and nontoxic, and as Attribute II sweet corn has been demonstrated to otherwise be substantially equivalent to conventional varieties of sweet corn, there is simply no need for further testing as there is no biological plausibility for chronic toxicity potential.  Here is a recent article that supports this position that long term studies are not necessary to evaluate the safety of genetically modified crops:

 

Snell C., Bernheim A., Bergé J.-B., Kuntz M., Pascal G., Paris A., Ricroch A.E. (2012). Assessment of the health impact of GM plants in long-term and multigenerational animal feeding trials: a literature review. Food and Chemical Toxicology 50:1134-1148.

 

Lastly, expression of these proteins by Attribute II and other corn varieties is beneficial in terms of food safety.  Minimized insect feeding damage is directly correlated with reduced infection of the corn ear by the ubiquitous fungi that produce mycotoxins, many of which potent liver and kidney toxins and carcinogens.

Posted on April 11, 2018
Interesting question - that's a good example of how the term "GMO" (genetically modified organism) is too vague to be really useful. In a sense, yes, your genes are modified compared to both of your parents. And you're definitely not genetically identical to your parents (unless you're a yeast, or a starfish, or a willow tree, or some other organism that can reproduce asexually).   But in common usage, the term GMO refers to an organism containing a gene... Read More
Posted on March 1, 2018
I don't see organic foods becoming obsolete in the future, but I could see what qualifies as certified organic changing over time. There is some debate right now about whether or not the meaning of organic is being diluted. For example, look at growing produce hydroponically. There are some who do not want hydroponics to fall under the organic label. They believe organic should be about taking care of the soil as much if not more than growing the crop, and when there's no soil involved... Read More
Posted on March 1, 2018
GMOs are crops - and like any other version of the same crop, where you grow them and how you grow them is far more important than whether they are GMOs. No known system of agriculture can promise that it is sustainable forever; much agricultural research is being devoted to improving the sustainability of agriculture. In this regard, it appears likely that using GM technologies may improve sustainability of a particular crop cultured in a specific manner and place. Other... Read More
Answer:

Explore More Topics