Genetically modified organism (GMO) test kits are readily available on the market now, while manufacturers have more in development. It prompts the question aWhy?' Product developers and manufacturers must think there is a market for GM test kits today's commercial world is too competitive to allow for speculative developments. Eric Russell reports.
It could be argued that more genetically modified (GM) foods are coming into Europe via the back door which results in a greater need for GM testing in the absence of any governmental solutions. Individual retailers are having to check for themselves the status of the products they buy in. And, if public concern continues to grow, then individual consumers may want testing kits for use in their own homes.
Consumers have plenty to worry about. It is widely felt that governments have underestimated the complexity of the food chain and how products are transported around the world. When grain from several sources is loaded into one bulk tanker, how is that to be tested for GM content?
Already, bulk grain is permitted to contain one per cent of GM product simply because it is not possible in the present way of trading to prevent GM crops entering the food chain.
Rogue traders
If testing is not practical, then auditing must be enforced. But policing a global food chain is far from practical at the moment. There will always be rogue traders and while the countries they operate from may not be on any accepted suppliers list, GM products could be passed through a country that is an accepted supplier.
There is also the problem that a GM ingredient may not be detectable in an end product. GM soya oil, for example, often cannot be detected in an end product.
Consumers feel they are short on information; they cannot see any benefits from GM foods; and they feel that the GM industry is tampering with nature just for the benefit of chemical companies and farmers.
They are concerned at the lack of consumer representation on regulatory bodies; they do not have an adequate choice over the products that are already on the market; and they do not have the means to completely avoid GM products if they want to, although improved labelling will help.
The subject is of great concern to the UK's Consumers' Association and Sue Davies, principal policy advisor, says the Association has been studying the whole scenario, including the European and global dimensions, in depth. It has now produced a comprehensive, 130page report called GM Dilemmas and it makes very disturbing reading.
In the UK, its research findings show that there is a clear mis-match between the government's attitude and that of consumers. There is also a failure to appreciate the reasons for this concern. The EU attitude also leaves room for concern.
The report reveals that consumers believe that the main beneficiaries of the use of GM in food production are the companies that develop the technology, while consumers themselves see little in it for them.
Although GM has the potential to offer consumer benefits in the future, including improved nutritional content and taste, for example, this is not evident from the crops currently on the market. These have been modified to offer benefits to producers, such as tolerance to weed killers.
Admittedly, the European Parliament, at its first reading, has narrowly voted in favour of full labelling of GM derivatives in food. In addition, proposals to introduce traceability of GM products and the labelling of all GM derivatives are now being discussed.
Although there have been no further EU approvals of GM products since 1998, the first two crops to come onto the market, GM soya and maize, have already had an enormous impact and could be present in a wide range of foods as well as in animal feed.
More products in the pipeline
GM processing aids are already widely used in food production, and many more products are in the pipeline. The US is far more advanced than Europe with several crops, fruit and vegetables being marketed. The failure of US producers to segregate GM crops also means that it is difficult to keep these crops out of European foods and ingredients.
In many ways it appears that governments have already made their mind up that consumers have to accept GM foods. The general implications of that outlook are far reaching, and not only for food, especially if there is no effective reaction from consumers.
Test kits for genetically modified organisms. See page 37.
