Genetycznie modyfikowane uprawy a zrównoważone rolnictwo i nasze zdrowie

• Autorzy: Lisowska K.

Warianty tytułu

EN

Genetically modified crops, sustainable development and our health

• Języki publikacji: PL

Abstrakty

PL

Technologia GMO w odniesieniu do rolnictwa i produkcji żywności jest przedmiotem nieustannych kontrowersji. Z jednej strony silne lobby związane z międzynarodowymi korporacjami prowadzi bardzo intensywny marketing upraw GMO i promocję osiągnięć biotechnologii. Z drugiej strony organizacje konsumenckie i ekologiczne ostrzegają przed potencjalnymi szkodliwymi skutkami dla zdrowia i dla środowiska. Ryzyko upraw GMO związane z ingerencją w środowisko naturalne jest bardziej oczywiste i jest dość otwarcie artykułowane przez przyrodników i specjalistów w zakresie ekologii. Wyraża je jasno oświadczenie Komitetu Ochrony Środowiska PAN, w którym zawarty jest wniosek o moratorium na uprawy odmian GMO w Polsce. Zupełnie przeciwstawne stanowisko prezentuje Komitet Biotechnologii PAN, który przekonuje, że żywność otrzymana z GM odmian jest bezpieczna dla zdrowia, a same uprawy nie stanowią zagrożenia dla środowiska. W niniejszym opracowaniu przedstawiona będzie ocena technologii GMO w rolnictwie amerykańskim, opublikowana w tym roku przez Amerykańską Akademię Nauk. Omówione będą także zagadnienia wydajności i opłacalności tych upraw, poziom zużycia pestycydów oraz wyniki prac badawczych wskazujących na nieobojętny dla metabolizmu komórkowego wpływ diety zawierającej zboża wyprodukowane w technologii GMO.

EN

There are continuous controversies concerning the issue of the GMO technology in agriculture and food production. On one hand there is a strong lobby connected with international corporations which performs a very intensive marketing of the GMO crops together with the promotion of the biotechnological achievements. On the other hand however, consumer and environmental organisations alarm against the potentially harmful effects for health and the environment. The risk associated with the GMO crops related to the intrusion into the natural environment is more obvious and better pronounced by environmentalists and ecology experts. It is clearly expressed by the statement of the Environmental Protection Committee of the Polish Academy of Sciences which includes a motion for a memorandum on GMO crops cultivation in Poland. A contrary position however is represented by the Biotechnology Committee of the Polish Academy of Sciences which convinces that the food produced from GM varieties is safe for health and that the crops do not pose any risk to the environment. The paper presents the assessment of GMO technology in American agriculture, where its history is the oldest, published by the American Academy of Sciences. The issues of efficiency and economic viability of these crops are presented together with the level of pesticides consumption and the results of studies proving a neutral impact of a diet including GM technology produced cereals on the cellular metabolism.

Słowa kluczowe

PL

genetycznie zmodyfikowane organizmy; GMO; rolnictwo; agrobiznes; biotechnologia; korporacje; lobbing; środowisko naturalne; zdrowie; glifosat; Roundup

EN

geneticacally modified organisms; GMO; agriculture; agrobusiness; biotechnology; corporations; lobbing; natural environment; health; gliphospate; Roundup

• Wydawca: Górnośląska Wyższa Szkoła Pedagogiczna im. Kardynała Augusta Hlonda
• Czasopismo: Journal of Ecology and Health
• Rocznik: 2010
• Tom: R. 14, nr 6
• Strony: 303--309
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 36 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Lisowska K.

• Centrum Badań Translacyjnych i Biologii Molekularnej Nowotworów, Centrum Onkologii - Instytut im. Marii Skłodowskiej-Curie, Oddział w Gliwicach

Bibliografia

• [1] National Research Council. 2010. The Impact of Genetically Engineered Crops on Farm Sustainability in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
• [2] Economic impact of Dominant GM Crops Worldwide: a Review. EUR 22547 EN Manuel Gómez-Barbero, Emilio Rodriguez-Cerezo. EUROPEAN COMMISSION DG JRC-IPTS, Sustainability in Agriculture, Food and Health Unit December 2006.
• [3] Failure to yield: Evaluating the Performance of Genetically Engineered Crops. Doug Gurian-Sherman, Union of Concerned Scientists, April 2009.
• [4] The Organic Center Critical Issue Report: The magnitude and impact of the biotech and organic organic seed price premium, Charles Benbrook, December 2009).
• [5] The Organic Center Critical Issue Report: Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use in the United States: The First Thirteen Years, Charles Benbrook November 2009.
• [6] Ferre J., Van Rie J.: Biochemistry and genetics of insect resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis. Annu Rev. Entomol. 2002; 47: 501 -33. Review.
• [7] Griffitts J.S., Aroian R.V.: Many roads to resistance: how invertebrates adapt to Bt toxins. Bioessays. 2005 Jun; 27(6): 614-24. Review.
• [8] Heckel D.G., Gahan L.J., Baxter S.W., Zhao J.Z., Shelton A.M., Gould F., Tabashnik B.E.: The diversity of Bt resistance genes in species of Lepidoptera. J Invertebr Pathol. 2007 Jul; 95(3): 192-7. Epub 2007 Mar 25. Review.
• [9] Downes S., Mahoń R., Olsen K.: Monitoring and adaptive resistance management in Australia for Bt-cotton: current status and future challenges. J Invertebr Pathol. 2007 Jul; 95(3): 208-13. Review.
• [10] Tabashnik B.E., Van Rensburg J.B., Carriere Y.: Field-evolved insect resistance to Bt crops: definition, theory, and data. J. Econ. Entomol. 2009 Dec; 102(6): 2011-25.Review.
• [11] Economic Impact of Dominant GM Crops Worldwide: a Review. EUR 22547 EN Manuel Gómez-Barbero, Emilio Rodriguez-Cerezo. EUROPEAN COMMISSION DG JRC-IPTS, Sustainability in Agriculture, Food and Health Unit December 2006.
• [12] Nguyen H.T., Jehle J.A.: Expression of Cry3Bbl in transgenic corn MON88017 J. Agric. Food Chem. 2009 Nov 11; 57(21): 9990-6.
• [13] Malatesta M., Caporaloni C, Rossi L., Battistelli S., Rocchi M.B., Tonucci F., Gazzanelli G.: Ultrastructural analysis of pancreatic acinar cells from mice fed on genetically modified soybean. J. Anat. 2002 Nov; 201(5): 409-15.
• [14] Malatesta M., Biggiogera M., Manuali E., Rocchi M.B., Baldelli B., Gazzanelli G.: Fine structural analyses of pancreatic acinar celi nuclei from mice fed on genetically modified soybean. Eur J. Histochem. 2003; 47(4): 385-8.
• [15] Vecchio L., Cisterna B., Malatesta M., Martin T.E., Biggiogera M.: Ultrastructural analysis of testes from mice fed on genetically modified soybean. Eur J Histochem. 2004 Oct-Dec; 48(4): 448-54.
• [16] Cisterna B.t Flach F., Vecchio L., Barabino S.M., Battistelli S., Martin T.E.,Malatesta M., Biggiogera M.: Can a genetically-modified organism-containing diet influence embryo development? A preliminary study on pre-implantation mouse embryos. Eur J. Histochem. 2008 Oct-Dec; 52(4): 263-7.
• [17] Battistelli S., Citterio B., Baldelli B., Parlani C, Malatesta M.: Histochemical and morpho-metrical study of mouse intestine epithelium after a long term diet containing genetically modified soybean. Eur J. Histochem. 2010Aug; 54(3): e36.
• [18] Malatesta M., Caporaloni C, Gavaudan S., Rocchi M.B., Serafini S., Tiberi C, Gazzanelli G.: Ultrastructural morphometrical and immunocytochemical analyses of hepatocyte nuclei from mice fed on genetically modified soybean. Cell Struct Funct. 2002 Aug; 27(4): 173-80. Erratum in: Cell Struct Funct. 2002 Oct; 27(5): 399.
• [19] Malatesta M., Tiberi C, Baldelli B., Battistelli S., Manuali E., Biggiogera M.: Reversibility of hepatocyte nuclear modifications in mice fed on genetically modified soybean. Eur J. Histochem. 2005 Jul-Sep; 49(3): 237-42.
• [20] Malatesta M., Boraldi F., Annovi G., Baldelli B., Battistelli S., Biggiogera M., Quaglino D.: A long-term study on female mice fed on a genetically modified soybean: effects on liverageing. Histochem Cell Biol. 2008 Nov; 130(5): 967-77.
• [21] Malatesta M, Perdoni F., Santin G., Battistelli S., Muller S., Biggiogera M.: Hepatoma tissue culture (HTC) cells as a model for investigating the effects of low concentrations of herbicide on celi structure and function. Toxicolln Vitro. 2008 Dec; 22(8): 1853-60.
• [22] de Vendómois J.S., Roullier F., Cellier D., Seralini G.E.: A comparison of the effects of three GM corn varieties on mammalian health. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2009 Dec 10; 5(7): 706-26.
• [23] Seralini G.E., de Vendómois J.S., Cellier D., Sułtan C, Buiatti M., Gallagher L., Antoniou M., Dronamraju K.R.: How subchronic and chronic health effects can be neglected for GMOs, pesticides or chemicals. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2009 Jun 17; 5(5): 438-43. Review.
• [24] Williams G.M., Kroes R., Munro I.C.: Safety evaluation and risk assessment of the herbicide Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, for humans. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2000 Apr; 31(2 Pt 1): 117-65. Review.
• [25] Paganelli A., Gnazzo V., Acosta H., Lopez S.L., Carrasco A.E.: Glyphosate-Based Herbicides Produce Teratogenic Effects on Vertebrates by Impairing Retinoic Acid Signaling. Chem Res Toxicol. 2010 Aug 9.
• [26] Richard S., Moslemi S., Sipahutar H., Benachour N., Seralini G.E.: Differential effects of glyphosate and roundup on human placental cells and aromatase. Environ Health Perspect. 2005 Jun; 113(6): 716-20.
• [27] Haefs R., Schmitz-Eiberger M., Mainx H.G., Mittelstaedt W., Noga G.: Studies on a new group of biodegradable surfactants for glyphosate. Pest Manag Sci. 2002 Aug; 58(8): 825-33.
• [28] Marc J., Mulner-Lorillon O., Boulben S., Hureau D., Durand G., Belle R.: Pesticide Roundup provokes celi division dysfunction at the level of CDKl/cyclin B activation. Chem Res Toxicol. 2002 Mar; 15(3): 326-31.
• [29] Benachour N., Seralini G.E.: Glyphosate formulations induce apoptosis and necrosis in human umbilical, embryonic, and placental cells. Chem Res Toxicol. 2009 Jan; 22(1): 97-105.
• [30] Gasnier C, Dumont C, Benachour N., Clair E., Chagnon M.C., Seralini G.E.: Glyphosate-based herbicides are toxic and endocrine disruptors in human cell lines. Toxicology. 2009 Aug 21; 262(3): 184-91.
• [31] Marc J., Mulner-Lorillon O., Belle R.: Glyphosate-based pesticides affect cell cycle regulation. Biol Celi. 2004 Apr; 96(3): 245-9.
• [32] Belle R., Le Bouffant R., Morales J., Cosson B., Cormier P., Mulner-Lorillon O.: [Sea urchin embryo, DNA-damaged cell cycle checkpoint and the mechanisms initiating cancer development]. JSoc Biol. 2007; 201(3): 317-27.
• [33] Marc J., Belle R., Morales J., Cormier P., Mulner-Lorillon O.: Formulated glyphosate activates the DNA-response checkpoint of the cell cycle leading to the prevention of G2/M transition. Toxicol Sci. 2004 Dec; 82(2): 436-42.
• [34] Manas F., Peralta L., Raviolo J., Garcia Ovando H., Weyers A., Ugnia L., Gonzalez Cid M., Lampa I., Gorla N.: Genotoxicity of AMPA, the environmental metabolite of glyphosate, assessed by the Comet assay and cytogenetic tests. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2009 Mar; 72(3): 834-7.
• [35] Manas F., Peralta L., Garcia Ovando H., Weyers A., Ugnia L., Larripa I., Gonzalez Cid M., Gorla N.: Genotoxicity of Glyphosate assessed by the comet assay and cytogenetic tests. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology 28 (2009): 37-41.
• [36] Lajmanovich R.C., Sandoval M.T., Peltzer P.M.: Induction of mortality and malformation in Scinax nasicus tadpoles exposed to glyphosate formulations. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol. 2003 Mar; 70(3): 612-8.