Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Food, Genetically Modified”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

How to make foods safer--genetically modified foods.

It is the responsibility of companies developing genetically modified foods, and of regulatory authorities that approve their marketing, to ensure that they are at least as safe as the traditional foods they are intended to replace in the diet. This requires that any novel material introduced into the food material should not be allergenic. If the novel gene has come from an allergenic source, e.g. nuts, it is necessary to demonstrate using immunological procedures applied to the IgE fractions of pooled sera from individuals with confirmed allergies that the novel protein is non-allergenic. When the novel gene is from a non-allergenic source then it is necessary to demonstrate lack of significant amino acid sequence homology to known allergens together with sensitivity to food manufacturing and digestive processes. Consumer confidence in genetically modified foods would be significantly improved if hypoallergenic varieties of crops and food products that are currently allergenic could be developed. Techniques such as antisense technology and single site amino acid substitution have been shown to have such potential.

Animals↗
PubMed2001

Health and safety issues pertaining to genetically modified foods.

Genetic modification involves the insertion of genes from other organisms (within or between species) into host cells to select for desirable qualities. Potential benefits of GM foods include increased nutritional value; reduced allergenicity; pest and disease-resistance; and enhanced processing value. Possible detrimental outcomes include producing foods with novel toxins, allergens or reduced nutritional value, and development of antibiotic resistance or herbicide-resistant weeds. Benefits to individuals or populations need to be weighed against adverse health and environmental risks, and may differ between developing and Westernised countries. Whether testing and monitoring should exceed requirements for conventional foods is under debate. While not necessarily scientifically justifiable, consumer concerns have resulted in Australian and New Zealand requirements to label foods containing GM-produced proteins. Dissatisfied consumer advocacy groups are calling for all foods involving GM technology to be labelled, irrelevant of whether the final product contains novel protein. Goals to improve the quantity, quality and safety of foods are laudable; however, the primary aim of the bio-food industry is financial gain. GM foods may be as safe as conventional foods but public distrust runs high. It is important that discussion is informed by science and that claims of both benefits and risks are evidence-based, to ensure that the process is driven neither by the vested interest of the bio-technical multinational companies on the one hand, nor ill-informed public fears on the other.

Attitude to Health↗
PubMed2003

[Nutrition and health--genetically modified food].

The genetically modified (GM) crops cultivated at present have new properties of benefit to agriculture. It is expected that in the future GM crops will also be cultivated with more complex genetic modifications that are aimed at improving the nutritional and health value to the consumer. The safety assessment of GM foods before market approval is based on a comparison of the characteristics of the GM food with those of the conventional counterpart. Identified differences are thoroughly tested for their toxicological and nutritional consequences. Supplementary modern analytical techniques are being developed for the assessment of future complex GM foods. No cases of adverse health or nutritional effects in consumers have been reported for the existing generation of GM foods. The feasibility of post-market surveillance of (GM) foods, in order to identify small or chronic effects that have not been noticed in the pre-market phase, is being investigated, yet its value should not be overestimated. Surveillance can be informative in case of specific questions concerning certain products as long as the consumer intake is well documented. To this end traceability and labelling systems must be set up.

Consumer Behavior↗
PubMed2002

Substantial equivalence--an appropriate paradigm for the safety assessment of genetically modified foods?

Safety assessment of genetically modified food crops is based on the concept of substantial equivalence, developed by OECD and further elaborated by FAO/WHO. The concept embraces a comparative approach to identify possible differences between the genetically modified food and its traditional comparator, which is considered to be safe. The concept is not a safety assessment in itself, it identifies hazards but does not assess them. The outcome of the comparative exercise will further guide the safety assessment, which may include (immuno)toxicological and biochemical testing. Application of the concept of substantial equivalence may encounter practical difficulties: (i) the availability of near-isogenic parental lines to compare the genetically modified food with; (ii) limited availability of methods for the detection of (un)intended effects resulting from the genetic modification; and (iii) limited information on natural variations in levels of relevant crop constituents. In order to further improve the methodology for identification of unintended effects, new 'profiling' methods are recommended. Such methods will allow for the screening of potential changes in the modified host organism at different integration levels, i.e. at the genome level, during gene expression and protein translation, and at the level of cellular metabolism.

Animals↗
PubMed1999

[Food additives and genetically modified food--a risk for allergic patients?].

Adverse reactions to food and food additives must be classified according to pathogenic criteria. It is necessary to strictly differentiate between an allergy, triggered by a substance-specific immunological mechanism, and an intolerance, in which no specific immune reaction can be established. In contrast to views expressed in the media, by laymen and patients, adverse reactions to additives are less frequent than is believed. Due to frequently "alternative" methods of examination, an allergy to food additives is often wrongly blamed as the cause of a wide variety of symptoms and illness. Diagnosing an allergy or intolerance to additives normally involves carrying out double-blind, placebo-controlled oral provocation tests with food additives. Allergic reactions to food additives occur particularly against additives which are organic in origin. In principle, it is possible that during the manufacture of genetically modified plants and food, proteins are transferred which potentially create allergies. However, legislation exists both in the USA (Federal Drug Administration, FDA) and in Switzerland (Ordinance on the approval process for GM food, GM food additives and GM accessory agents for processing) which require a careful analysis before a genetically modified product is launched, particularly where foreign genes are introduced. Products containing genetically modified organisms (GMO) as additives must be declared. In addition, the source of the foreign protein must be identified. The "Round-up ready" (RR) soya flour introduced in Switzerland is no different from natural soya flour in terms of its allergenic potential. Genetically modified food can be a blessing for allergic individuals if gene technology were to succeed in removing the allergen (e.g. such possibilities exist for rice). The same caution shown towards genetically modified food might also be advisable for foreign food in our diet. Luckily, the immune system of the digestive tract in healthy people tolerates foreign antigens. Food allergies in adults occur mainly among those allergic to pollen.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Assessment of the food safety issues related to genetically modified foods.

International consensus has been reached on the principles regarding evaluation of the food safety of genetically modified plants. The concept of substantial equivalence has been developed as part of a safety evaluation framework, based on the idea that existing foods can serve as a basis for comparing the properties of genetically modified foods with the appropriate counterpart. Application of the concept is not a safety assessment per se, but helps to identify similarities and differences between the existing food and the new product, which are then subject to further toxicological investigation. Substantial equivalence is a starting point in the safety evaluation, rather than an endpoint of the assessment. Consensus on practical application of the principle should be further elaborated. Experiences with the safety testing of newly inserted proteins and of whole genetically modified foods are reviewed, and limitations of current test methodologies are discussed. The development and validation of new profiling methods such as DNA microarray technology, proteomics, and metabolomics for the identification and characterization of unintended effects, which may occur as a result of the genetic modification, is recommended. The assessment of the allergenicity of newly inserted proteins and of marker genes is discussed. An issue that will gain importance in the near future is that of post-marketing surveillance of the foods derived from genetically modified crops. It is concluded, among others that, that application of the principle of substantial equivalence has proven adequate, and that no alternative adequate safety assessment strategies are available.

Genetic Engineering↗
PubMed2003

In vivo studies on possible health consequences of genetically modified food and feed--with particular regard to ingredients consisting of genetically modified plant materials.

This synopsis reviews published in vivo studies on possible health consequences of genetically modified food and feed where the ingredients in question have consisted of genetically modified plant materials. The following, however, have not been taken into consideration:--ingredients consisting of genetically modified microorganisms or parts of animals/fish--ingredients produced by/from genetically modified organisms but without any DNA present--studies on consequences for the environment or biodiversity--in vitro studies or computer simulations. According to a Norwegian report "Gen-mat" (NOU 2000:29), and a more recent search in Medline and Citations Index, to our knowledge a total of ten studies have been published on the health effects of GM-foods and feeds. In this minireview the data made available in these published studies is discussed.

Animal Feed↗
PubMed2002

Genetically modified foods: a taste of the future.

Technologies for genetically modifying foods hold tremendous promise for meeting important public health challenges in this century. By keeping informed of the ongoing development of genetically modified foods, nurses can effectively educate patients about the benefits and risks of these foods and promote informed decision making.

Food Technology↗
PubMed2002

Consumer attitudes towards genetically modified foods.

The present study reports attitudes towards genetically modified (GM) foods among Swedish consumers. A random nation-wide sample of 2,000 addressees, aged 18-65 years, were mailed a questionnaire and 786 (39%) responded. Most of these consumers were rather negative about GM foods. However, males, younger respondents and those with higher level of education were more positive than were females, older respondents and those with lower level of education. A majority of the consumers had moral and ethical doubts about eating GM foods and did not perceive attributes like better taste or lower price beneficial enough to persuade them to purchase GM foods. However, tangible benefits, like being better for the environment or healthier, seemed to increase willingness to purchase GM foods.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

Gene transfer from genetically modified food.

The current debate about the safety of genetically modified food includes some important scientific issues where more scientific data would aid the robustness of safety evaluation. One example is the possibility of gene transfer, especially from genetically modified plant material.

Bacteria↗
PubMed2003

Clinical and laboratory investigation of allergy to genetically modified foods.

Technology has improved the food supply since the first cultivation of crops. Genetic engineering facilitates the transfer of genes among organisms. Generally, only minute amounts of a specific protein need to be expressed to obtain the desired trait. Food allergy affects only individuals with an abnormal immunologic response to food--6% of children and 1.5-2% of adults in the United States. Not all diseases caused by food allergy are mediated by IgE. A number of expert committees have advised the U.S. government and international organizations on risk assessment for allergenicity of food proteins. These committees have created decision trees largely based on assessment of IgE-mediated food allergenicity. Difficulties include the limited availability of allergen-specific IgE antisera from allergic persons as validated source material, the utility of specific IgE assays, limited characterization of food proteins, cross-reactivity between food and other allergens, and modifications of food proteins by processing. StarLink was a corn variety modified to produce a (Italic)Bacillus thuringiensis(/Italic) (Bt) endotoxin, Cry9C. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention investigated 51 reports of possible adverse reactions to corn that occurred after the announcement that StarLink, allowed for animal feed, was found in the human food supply. Allergic reactions were not confirmed, but tools for postmarket assessment were limited. Workers in agricultural and food preparation facilities have potential inhalation exposure to plant dusts and flours. In 1999, researchers found that migrant health workers can become sensitized to certain Bt spore extracts after exposure to Bt spraying.

Animal Feed↗
PubMed2003

Key issues for the assessment of the allergenic potential of genetically modified foods: breakout group reports.

On the final afternoon of the workshop "Assessment of the Allergenic Potential of Genetically Modified Foods," held 10-12 December 2001 in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA, speakers and participants met in breakout groups to discuss specific questions in the areas of use of human clinical data, animal models to assess food allergy, biomarkers of exposure and effect, sensitive populations, dose-response assessment, and postmarket surveillance. Each group addressed general questions regarding allergenicity of genetically modified foods and specific questions for each subject area. This article is a brief summary of the discussions of each of the six breakout groups regarding our current state of knowledge and what information is needed to advance the field.

Biomarkers↗
PubMed1999

Worlds apart? The reception of genetically modified foods in Europe and the U.S.

Recent controversies about genetically modified foods in the United Kingdom and several other European countries highlight the apparent differences that exist in public opinion on this subject across the Atlantic. Why are people in the United States seemingly untroubled by a technology that causes Europeans so many difficulties? The results of survey research on public perceptions of biotechnology in Europe and the United States during 1996-1997, together with an analysis of press coverage and policy formation from 1984 to 1996, can help to answer this question.

Attitude↗