In a recent interview with Reality Check radio, Judith Collins, Minister for Science, Innovation and Technology, once again assured us that the Government’s controversial decision to lift the ban on GE field trials is completely safe. Why? Well, because other countries are also doing it!
However, a recently published study in Nature — www.nature.com/articles/s41588-024-01758-y — shows that the use of CRISPR/“gene scissors” technology causes unintended genetic changes that are different to random mutations. According to the study, major structural changes in chromosomes occur much more frequently in the genomic regions targeted by the “gene scissors” than would otherwise be the case.
In humans and animals, these kinds of changes are particularly associated with the risk of cancer. As far as plants are concerned, the risks are different and principally include, for example, negative environmental effects and a change in the composition of food derived from these plants.
Breeding can also be affected: if the unintended changes go unnoticed, they can accumulate in the genetic material of plants, and thus impair both the genetic stability of future plant varieties and their suitability for use in agriculture.
New Zealand’s royal inquiry into genetic engineering in 2000 advised a cautious approach to genetic modification, allowing the technology to proceed but with stringent controls and monitoring to manage risks and uncertainties.
This wise advice is valid even more today, with more science coming forth about the risks associated with gene editing technologies. The unintended consequences can put human health, nature and food at risk, not to mention NZ farming. Any GMO must be put through the most stringent safety checks for impacts on human health and the environment. Also, any GMO product must have mandatory labelling and a mandatory audit trail to allow traceability throughout the food system.
Some GE genies are best left in the bottle, as we can’t reverse the unintended consequences of their release.
Simin Williams
2 comments
As the paper cited alludes to, there are a range of solutions for the risks identified and newer CRISPR-based tools aim to reduce risks of chromosome arm truncation by avoiding the double-strand breaks that can lead to genomic instability.
The technological developments are moving so rapidly it's probably already obsolete, but a useful summary of the situation was published last year by Hunt, J.M.T., et al.: "Unintended CRISPR-Cas9 editing outcomes: a review of the detection and prevalence of structural variants generated by gene-editing in human cells." To date no adverse events related to these issues have been reported in clinical trials.
JOIN THE CONVERSATION
Read and post comments with a
Newsroom Pro subscription.
Subscribe now to start a free
28-day trial.