Our curiosity was peaked and we went to the store and bought our pack of cotton candy grapes.
First off I have to say I really like these grapes. They were too expensive for me to buy except as more of a novelty every once in awhile, but at the end of the day they have a very unique flavor.
My commentary today is nothing against the grape or the company that sells them. It was just as I started looking at the grape packaging I realized that my definition of genetic manipulation is probably pretty far off from the general consumer.
On the very top left of the bag was a great big "NON-GMO" sign. My wife is the one who pointed the non-GMO label out and said "I call BS - they are cotton candy flavored!" What that label is really saying is these grapes were made with good ole conventional breeding and thus non-GMO. Plants were pollinated and the genes that give a cotton candy flavor were transferred to the plants that are harvested for the store. The site even claims the same thing.
If I were to make a "GMO" cotton candy grape I would find those exact same genes and just insert them using a biotech approach. In this case it may be faster because only the genes involved in the flavor would be inserted. In breeding the genes that give the flavor are moved over but maybe other genes that are not good are moved over too. So it takes many years to grow and select the best plant. Both GMO and conventional breeding are valid methods and both have their place in food production. The real take home is that both methods involve moving genes from one location to another. The DNA is being manipulated whether through breeding or laboratory techniques. As an aside even traditional breeding is starting to use sequencing and laboratory techniques to become more efficient.
As I looked at the Non-GMO designation on these "Cotton Candy" grape I had to chuckle. My wife did have a point. The non-GMO designation has a meaning and by that definition the grapes are "non-GMO", but at the same time that label it is a smokescreen in my opinion. Those grapes were genetically modified no matter what a label that is really only used for marketing says. Vast amounts of DNA were moved and incorporated into a plant to get the grapes you are eating. Yes I know it was not in the lab. But the crazy thing is if the lab did the manipulation less genes are being manipulated than when done in a field through breeding. We eat food with DNA manipulation from a field everyday. This is food which has thousands of gene differences compared to its undomesticated ancestors, but we fear food that has only 1 or 2 genes added. Remember those 1 or 2 genes have gone through testings on par with a new drug being released. Lots and lots of questions must be answered from our regulatory agencies before foods with those "GMO" genes are released into our stores. Those thousands of gene differences from traditional breeding are not tested at all. Those changes are not even documented because it is the norm to assume they are safe. So why the hate for 1 or 2 genes added by a biotech approach that are studied and known to be safe?
This cartoon shows this DNA difference in a graphic form.
The irony is that a "NON-GMO" plant was genetically modified. The term GMO is so misleading and has become a term that is misunderstood. Everything we eat is a product of genetic manipulation. That cotton candy flavor does not exist without genes encoded from DNA that has been transferred to a new grape cultivar. A "GMO" plant is also a plant that has had a DNA transfer. The crazy part is that "GMO" plants have less DNA manipulation and every aspect of that manipulation has been tested for years. Every base pair change or addition is cataloged. Some may even argue that "GMO" food is safer because it has been tested more extensively. Yet in society it is the Non-GMO label that is sought after without any real basis for why we want food with that label. Non-GMO labeled food is fine, but the "GMO" food is just fine too.
Traditional breeding is great. It is a staple tool in genetic manipulation of plants. When you see that "NON-GMO" label next time just know that even though traditional breeding was used, the food really is genetically modified.
When a food label in the United States says it is GMO-free, they really mean that the product is not a "Transgenic Organism". The USDA defines this as follows: "Transgenic organism: An organism resulting from the insertion of genetic material from another organism using recombinant DNA techniques". I think the key thing to understand here is that organisms (plants, animals, bacteria, fungi, viruses, etc.) which are defined as GMO have DNA from an entirely different species. In GMO crops like GMO Corn, GMO Soybean, and GMO Cotton, the DNA that is brought into the plant is typically from a bacterium that has a natural resistance to an herbicide chemical. This gives farmers the ability to manage weeds with just one broad-spectrum herbicide, rather than careful, repeated applications of more selective herbicides. Crops that are non-GMO (which is almost all of the fruits and veggies you will find in the produce aisle at the supermarket) are certainly products of selective breeding, but they are not GMO because they do not contain DNA from a different species of organism.
ReplyDeleteTo put it more simply:
DeleteGMO Corn contains Corn DNA, as well as a tiny bit of DNA from a bacterium*
Grapes contain only Grape DNA^
*I refer specifically to current varieties of herbicide-tolerant corn which have been developed through the use of transgenic modification. This corn is largely grown for the processing industry (to be used in various corn-based products, such as corn syrup).
^I don't believe there are any approved varieties of GMO Grapes. Though they have existed since the mid 1990's and have been grown in regulated trials in the United States and at least 6 other countries.
Sources:
http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/database/plants/73.grape_vine.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_maize