Please activate Javascript. Without Javascript activated some functions do not work. | ||||||||
News/Current Affairs News Messages Stories Country Reports |
||||||||
Grocery Shopping Fruit and Vegetables Crops and Cereals Processed Foods Ingredients and Additives |
||||||||
Agri-Biotechnology Breeding Aims GMO Planting Field Trials Sustainability |
||||||||
GMO Database |
||||||||
Safety Environmental Safety Human Health |
||||||||
Regulation Regulatory Process Labelling Coexistence |
||||||||
Service |
Mar 28, 2015 | | | 6:49 pm |
Site Search
See what’s what.
Newsletter
Contact
|
Most genetically modified plants grown today have traits that facilitate production at the farm. The latest GM plants in the development pipeline, however, offer more than just agronomic advantages. Among the new possibilities for plant biotechnology is “biopharming”, or the production of pharmaceuticals or specialty chemicals in genetically modified plants. While progress in the US has been hampered by contamination scandals, European companies seem to have taken the lead by implementing strict safety controls right from the start. Imagine a field of potato plants. Imagine that each tuber contains proteins from the deadly Cholera bacterium. Although this may sound alarming, the potatoes were actually developed by researchers at the University of Rostock with the goal of delivering life-saving vaccines. The potatoes contain a bacterial protein that researchers hope will make the uptake of orally administered vaccines more efficient. It is hoped the "cholera potato" will help pave the way for the more effective delivery of oral vaccines produced in other transgenic plants. The field trial planted in June 2006 marks the first time that pharma-plants have been grown in Germany outside of a greenhouse.
When it was found that a few transgenic corn stalks had made their way into half a million bushels of soybeans, the US Department of Agriculture fined Prodiene $250,000 and ordered the company to purchase and destroy the almost $3 million worth of contaminated soybeans. In 2005, Anheuser-Busch, the largest buyer of rice in the US, announced it would not buy rice from Missouri farmers if the biotech company Ventria were to grow PMP rice in the state. Anheuser-Busch retracted its boycott only after Ventria insisted that the company's pharma-rice would be kept nearly 200 kilometres away from the nearest conventional rice field. Strategies for biocontainmentSecure biocontainment to keep pharmaceutical genes and products out of the environment and the food supply is essential for ensuring the safety and acceptance of biopharming. Some approaches simply involve maintaining wide separation distances between biopharming and food crops. Staggering planting by 25 days is another way of reducing the risk of unwanted out-crossing. In the case of maize, the likelihood of out-crossing can be further reduced by manually removing the pollen-releasing male flowers. Special care must also be taken to reserve farm machinery for biopharming use only. Furthermore, many demand that biopharming projects completely abandon working with food crops to reduce the risk of contaminating food supplies.
The hotly debated “terminator technology”, a genetic technology that makes transgenic seeds unable to grow, could also make for a useful approach. The complexity of germination restriction technologies, however, doesn’t offer 100% assurance that spread will never occur. Besides needing to ensure biocontainment, using plants to produce pharmaceuticals can be problematic because the desired substances are usually produced at low concentrations. In addition, developing a transgenic plant takes much more effort than creating transgenic bacterial strains. So why use plants for producing pharmaceuticals at all? For one, plants can produce a much wider range of compounds than microbial systems, as plant cells are more similar to human and animal cells. At the same time, there is no risk of contamination with dangerous pathogens, which is often a threat with animal produced pharmaceuticals. Furthermore, using plants can have a cost advantage to producing pharmaceuticals in animals or via more conventional biochemical processes. Production capacity can also be rapidly scaled up. In the case of an epidemic, it would be easier to expand biopharming than to install extra bioreactors or biochemical production facilities. Finally, some protein-based vaccines can be stored longer at room temperature when contained in plant tissue. This would facilitate delivering pharmaceuticals to remote regions in the third world that lack access to refrigeration. Europe pushes aheadGM plants have faced major criticism from European consumers. In some ways, however, scepticism among consumers has worked in the biotech industry’s favour. While the US pharmaceutical industry is still recovering from the fallout of ProdiGene and other scandals, European companies have paid attention to consumers and taken a more prudent approach right from the beginning. With very few exceptions, biopharming in Europe has been restricted to greenhouses, thus minimising the risk of food or environmental contamination. The French company Meristem Pharmaceuticals has been an exception, growing 20 hectares of GM maize modified to produce the enzyme lipase in open fields in 2005. The field trial was partially destroyed by activists. With more positive experience than the US, European governments are generously funding research on PMPs. There are several European companies currently developing plant systems for producing pharmaceuticals. Meristem Pharmaceuticals and the Danish Cobento Biotech are both conducting clinical trials with their PMPs. The range of pharmaceuticals that can now be produced in plants include several vaccines for humans and animals, growth hormones, insulin, blood substitutes, and trypsin inhibitor.
See also on GMO-Compass:
|
Stories
Further information
Crops and Cereals
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
© 2015 by GMO Compass. All rights reserved. | Imprint | website created by webmotive