Is our knowledge sufficient for safe use biotechnology?

This is a first brief introduction for the layman about this key issue.

Very incomplete knowledge about the subject matter

Biotechnology commonly claims to be "hi-tech" system. "Hi-tech" implies advanced mastery of the subject matter enabling sophisticated applications. - However the knowledge of the subject matter of biotechnology - DNA - is very incomplete. See "Incomplete knowledge about DNA". Here is a statement by a world leading scientists who has devoted many years to investigate the nature of DNA and how genes work in regulating all biological processes.

Because of this lack of knowledge it is completely impossible to foresee all the effects of the insertion of a foreign gene in a cell. There may occur complications that are impossible even to imagine today. It is expected to take decades, perhaps over a century before sufficient knowledge is gathered.

Important deficiencies in the technique

In addition, the methodology of genetic engineering is partly primitive. There are indeed a few sophisiticated components in it. One is the technique for extracting genes out of DNA. Also the methods for overcoming the natural barriers against intrusion of foreign genes are technically sophisticated. However they are not reliable, as the organisms can sometimes overcome them or move the inserted gene to another location, which means that you never can know whether all GE plants in a field really have the desired properties. In addition they are unsafe because they use potentially hazardous genetic elements (see The fate of food genes and the DNA CpG motif and its impact).

Another weakness is that GE cannot mimick the natural way of gene function. In nature, the genes are switched on and off depending on the need. Thereby the activity of every gene is finely attuned to the needs and conditions of the whole cell. But it is not possible to integrate the inserted genes into this system. To ensure their ability to produce the desired result, artificial so called promoters have to be included. These are however problematic and potentially hazardous in different ways, see How are genes engineered / Promoters.

A most important thing is that the methods for inserting the genes are very imprecise, in that it is impossible to direct where the gene will get inserted. As the position of the gene is of great importance for its effect, this is a great weakness and may cause unpredictable consequences.

So genetic engineering has very little knowledge of its subject matter, uses potentially hazardous methods and is unable to guide the insertion of genes. This makes the designation "hi-tech" unjustified as this designation implies advanced mastery of the subject matter and mastery over its practical results. However, things are even worse:

Outdated theoretical basis

The key assumption of genetic engineering is that you can "tailor" organisms by adding genes with desirable properties. However, this theory is completely outdated. The one-gene-one-property theory has been definitely proven wrong, see "Consensus among leading experts - genes are not carriers of isolated traits". The new insight was succintly expressed by a leading expert:

So genes don't work as isolated carriers of properties. Instead the effects of every gene is the outcome of interaction with its environment. This is further explained in "The new understanding of genes"  [ML]. A distinguished expert puts it like this:

Summary:

The knowledge about genes is very incomplete. In addition, the technique of genetic engineering is very imprecise. Consequently it is impossible to know the effects of artificial gene insertions. In fact the theory behind genetic engineering is outdated. Genes are not isolated carriers of properties and therefore isolated genes cannot be used for "tailoring of organisms" without unpredictable consequences.

A technique based on highly incomplete knowledge of its subject matter, based on an outdated idea, with a very imprecise methodology for inserting genes, having unpredictable effects is far from fullfilling the criteria of "Hi-Tech". It is rather a "pre-technology", yet on the experimental stage.

Actually, because of this lack of knowledge, every release of genetically organisms into nature today is an experiment with unpredictable results.

Genetically altered organisms cannot be recalled once released. They may spread widely and uncontrollably century after century, in the worst case indefinitely. Therefore it is more important than ever that science must know what it is doing. But the radically opposite situation is the case. It is impossible to exclude that the abnormality introduced into DNA through gene transfer may make GE organisms harmful to the environment in ways that cannot be imagined presently.

Conclusion

It is irresponsible to release any GE organism into nature. It is blind experimentation that can cause irreversible damage becauses released genes cannot be recalled.

Yet enormous numbers of GE organisms are released into nature today, especially in America, including a large part of the corn and soy crops in the US.

A global moratorium on the release of all GE organisms is necessary until science knows if this is safe which will take decades to find out. Until then they must be handled under strictly confined laboratory conditions.

Additional reasons for this conclusion are summarized in the document "Is there sufficient knowledge about environmental effects to justify release of GE organisms?" [ML]

Addition July 2007

In July 2007 a consortium of 35 groups of leading scientists published the conclusion that single genes are not carriers of isolated traits after a four year coordinated research effort. See "Genetech is based on an outdated understanding".

Although already more than ten years ago there was important evidence supporing this understanding, there has been a long period of scientifically ill-founded resistance from scientists sponsored by the biotech companies, see "Dysfunctional science". The conclusion of this authoritative consortium definitely puts an end to this pseudodebate that has confused politicians and postponed and adequate policy for safety assessment of GE foods.

It also underscores our conclusion that gene technology is so unpredictable that its commercial implementation can only be described as seriously irresponsible application of science and technology with unpredictable outcomes. Therefore it has to be stopped before a major disaster occurs.

Related articles

• "Incomplete knowledge about DNA"  [EL]
• "The cell - a miracle of cooperation" [EL]
• The new understanding of genes  [ML]
• Does science have enough knowledge about DNA to be able to predict and master the effects of genetic engineering? [ML]
• Toward a new paradigm for life - Beyond genetic determinism by Richard Stroman, Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology. A fresh very interesting explanation of the present status of the understanding of genetic regulation and a comment on the results of the Human Genome Project.