icon bookmark-bicon bookmarkicon cameraicon checkicon chevron downicon chevron lefticon chevron righticon chevron upicon closeicon v-compressicon downloadicon editicon v-expandicon fbicon fileicon filtericon flag ruicon full chevron downicon full chevron lefticon full chevron righticon full chevron upicon gpicon insicon mailicon moveicon-musicicon mutedicon nomutedicon okicon v-pauseicon v-playicon searchicon shareicon sign inicon sign upicon stepbackicon stepforicon swipe downicon tagicon tagsicon tgicon trashicon twicon vkicon yticon wticon fm
26 May, 2022 03:28

UK seeks to lift restrictions on genetically altered foods

A bill advancing through Parliament could pave the way for a boom in gene-edited crops and livestock
UK seeks to lift restrictions on genetically altered foods

British lawmakers could soon relax restrictions on genetically altered foods, with new legislation proposing more gene editing be allowed on certain crops, while insisting they will not constitute “genetically modified organisms” (GMOs), which are subject to heavy regulation. 

The new ‘Genetic Technology’ bill that was introduced in Parliament on Wednesday, is described by the UK's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs as a way to “cut red tape and support the development of innovative tech to grow more resistant, more nutritious, and more productive crops.”

“These precision technologies allow us to speed up the breeding of plants that have natural resistance to diseases and better use of soil nutrients so we can have higher yields with fewer pesticides and fertilisers,” Environment Secretary George Eustice said in a statement, adding that “Outside the EU we are free to follow the science.”

The EU currently defines gene-edited foods as a form of GMO and regulates them accordingly, in contrast with the US Department of Agriculture, which distinguishes between the two for regulatory purposes.

The new bill is more in line with the American stance, as it considers gene-editing to be fundamentally different from genetic modification, which involves the introduction of DNA from one species into another. Though a number of gene-edited crops can also be produced through more traditional cross-breeding methods, genetic editing can achieve the same results much faster and with more precision.

Some environmental activists have insisted there is no meaningful difference between the two, with a spokesperson for the Friends of the Earth organization arguing that “Gene editing is genetic modification by a different name.”

“It still focuses on altering the genetic code of plants and animals to deal with the problems caused by poor soils, the over-use of pesticides and intensive farming,” the organization said.

The government has nonetheless argued that cutting regulations for the practice could dramatically speed up the creation of new and enhanced crops and ultimately improve the country’s food security.

“We anticipate [the bill] will enable precision-bred crops to navigate the regulatory system much more quickly, in something like one year compared with approximately 10 years under the present regime,” Gideon Henderson, a scientific adviser for the government, said.

In its present form, the measure will apply only to England, potentially setting up disputes with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland which have their own regulations for the production and sale of GMOs and genetically edited foods.

The Scottish government recently warned that it would resist efforts by ministers in London to impose the rule in its territory, though the UK's environment secretary has argued neither Scotland nor Wales could prohibit the sale of such crops.

Though the legislation, if passed, will initially scale back restrictions on crops, it also contains provisions for livestock, as gene-editing can be used to breed animals more resilient to disease and other ailments. The practice has been more controversial for animals due to fears it could result in suffering; however, the new bill will allow lawmakers to similarly reduce red tape if they are satisfied it contains sufficient safeguards.