Government public relations drive on gene edited food

July2022

Analysis

Westminster is pulling out all the stops to force gene-edited foods down UK throats. Its tactics are very reminiscent of those employed a quarter-of-a-century ago, when first-generation GM foods were imminent. However, a couple of lessons have been learned from that first PR disaster.

Using confusing and inaccurate terminology to massage the negative connotations is still very much in evidence. Gene engineering using an editing device such as CRISPR [1] has become 'precision breeding'. The 'precision' part seems to refer to the intended DNA site which CRISPR is designed to cut, but doesn't extend to what happens next nor does it encompass other disturbances elsewhere in the genome [2,3]. The 'breeding' part makes it sound somehow natural, but is a nonsense: there's no breeding involved in gene-editing, apart from what's needed to sort out the rest of the genome afterwards.

By some miracle of semantics, gene-edited foods have become a 'natural' invention which can be patented [4]. The patent-driven control of our food by Big Biotech is an inconvenient truth being swept under the government rug [5].

Mixing up genetic engineering with science is an ongoing muddying-of-the-waters. Engineers build artificial things: scientists study the world around them. Gene engineering (including the editing variety) is a technique for creating organisms with in-built artefacts. It is the job of scientists to systematically interrogate the life-form the genetic engineer has created. The confusion has been easy to maintain, because scientists have used the technique of gene-engineering for decades as a tool to study gene function: the tool is not the science.

The commercial rationale for gene engineering (including editing), is based on highly (some would say dangerously) reductionist and outmoded scientific concepts [4]. The notion that anything engineered could somehow actually also have happened naturally is just silly [4].

Having learned from its past mistakes, which have made it very unpopular and untrusted, the biotech industry is throwing millions of pounds, euros and dollars at lobbying regulators all over the world to embrace gene-edited foods while sitting back and letting the governments do its PR for it. Thus, our Environment Secretary is centre stage stressing all the benefits he dreams gene-edited crops potentially/may/might/could/probably deliver.

In 2021, a government consultation showed that 88 percent of individuals and 64 percent of businesses wanted gene-edited foods to be recognised for what they are, GMOs, and regulated accordingly. Having learned from the 2003 'GM Nation' public engagement exercise that when people are educated about GM they become more concerned, the government put together a carefully managed 'awareness workshop' which successfully increased the number of people willing to eat gene-edited food from 30 to 74 percent (there were only 80 people, from undisclosed backgrounds, in this workshop).

The old 'fait-accompli' trick is being played for all it's worth. For example, if you believe the Environment Secretary, you'll hear how countries have already benefited from "dramatically reduced food waste" due to long-life gene-edited mushrooms (there's no sign of them), and from blood-pressure lowering tomatoes (there's no sign of these either), and from long-life gene-edited soya oil (this was designed to produce 'healthier' junk foods, but flopped due to poor yields and farmer rejection).

WHAT YOU CAN DO

Do you get the impression your opinion on gene-edited foods is being undemocratically manipulated and by-passed?

Offended?

Tell the Westminster government to stop playing fast and loose with your wishes, your health and your food supply.

The Scottish government is under intense pressure to fall into line with Westminster. Tell it to stick to its precautionary stance on GM foods (the one that got it voted into Holyrood).

You can contact all your representative in government through www.writetothem.com


Background

[1] CRISPR/Cas9 GENE EDITING - March 2016
[2] THE PRECISION PROBLEM IN GENE EDITING - August 2021
[3] GENE-EDITED MUSHROOMS - July 2022
[4] 'NATURAL' GENE EDITING JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN - July 2022
[5] GENE-EDITED CROPS: CONTROLLING, UNJUSTIFIABLE AND UNNECESSARY

- July 2022



SOURCES

·         Richard Vaughan, Genetically-edited tomatoes may be in supermarkets from next year, i, 21.05.22

·         UK environment secretary boosts GM gene-edited crops by misleading the public, GM Watch 23.05.22

·         Adam Vaughan, No UK supermarket is willing to say it will stock gene-edited food, Society, 24.05.22

·         Calyxt gene-edited soybean flops in the US, GM Watch, 7.05.21     

Photo Creative Commons