Dr. J. Craig Venter, Time's Scientist of the year (2000). President of the Celera Corporation. Dr. Venter is recognized as one of the two most important scientists in the worldwide effort to map the human genome.

Source: "The Genome Warrior", The New Yorker Magazine, June 12, 2000.

Incomplete knowledge about DNA

Genetic engineering is fundamentally different from natural breeding

In genetic engineering of food, DNA code sequences (genes) are artificially inserted into the DNA code sequence of the host. An inserted gene will mostly cause the production of new proteins, in most cases foreign to the host species. This kind of manipulation isfundamentally different from natural breeding. It is a very profound intervention into the control of biological systems. Therefore it is likely to have many and very complex consequences. Application of such a methodology should therefore require very exact knowledge about DNA and the way it controls cellular processes. Yet the opposite is rather the case.

Very scanty knowledge about DNA

• The research approach used for investigating DNA and its interactions with the cell is not suitable for a comprehensive understanding. It has has yielded a very fragmented picture. This is because it is focussed on analyzing the minutest parts but is lacking appropriate means for arriving at an understanding how the parts interact as an integrated whole. This is called "reductionism" and recently it is becoming recognized that this methodology is inadequate for arriving at an exhaustive understanding of biological systems. On the contrary, important aspects may be overlooked. For more, see "Is the scientific approach used by molecular biology sufficient...? "  [ML].
• Key life phenomena occur on a deeper level than presently investigated. DNA and other biomolecules have been treated as "microobjects" made up of material particles. However, several observations indicate that key phenomena in biological systems occur on a deeper level of nature, the "quantum level", that obeys different laws than those of material particles. An important aspect of quantum phenomena is that objects like molecules both behave as particle aggregates and as waves. Therefore consideration of quantum physical wave aspects is required to fully understand DNA and its functions. Virtually no knowledge about this aspect exists today in molecular biology. For more, see Is it sufficient to treat molecules like DNA as "microobjects"? [ML]
• Science knows the function of less than about 2 percent of the DNA in a cell. It is the part called "genes". The investigation of the remaining 98% of DNA has just begun. Experimental evidence are accumulating indicating that this "non-gene" part has important interactions with the genes. For more, see "Junk DNA" [EL]
• The basis of genetic engineering, the one-gene-one-property theory, has been proven untenable. The effects of a gene are the net results of interaction with many other genes as well as the environment within and outside the organism. This is a very complex process about which very little is known, and therefore it is completely impossible to predict all the effects of a gene transplanted into a foreign organism. For more, see "Is the doctrine "one gene - one property" valid?" [ML]

Conclusion - we know much too little to be able to master GE

Due to the very incomplete knowledge about DNA, it is neither possible to fully predict the influence of a gene transferred to a foreign context nor the effect of any other genetic manipulation. Molecular biology has been able to predict and experimentally verify that unforeseeable metabolic disturbances may occur due to genetic engineering. But, in addition to this, it cannot be ruled out that there might occur complications, the nature of which cannot even be predicted because of the incompletetness of knowledge.

Unexpected harmful consequences to health and environment may occur

Artificial manipulations of biological systems of any kind, when knowledge is incomplete, inevitably has lead to unpredictable complications, some of which have been harmful and difficult or impossible to master. This is especially problematic in the case of releasing genetically engineered genes into nature as these cannot be recalled.

Jaan Suurkula M.D.

Published June 1999.

Addition July 2007

International consortium of top scientists confirms that genetic engineering is inherently unpredictable

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"

This definitely confirms the point, stated in the article above, that the one-gene-one-trait concept is wrong.

Although already more than ten years ago there was important evidence supporing this point, 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.

Also other points, especially concerning the nature of "Junk DNA" and the quantum nature of DNA has been confirmed beyond any doubt.

This 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, potentially dangerous outcomes. Therefore it has to be stopped before a major disaster occurs.

Addition April 2008

Non-Target effects underscore the hazardous unpredictability of genetic engineering

Non-target effects are effects of genetic engineering that occur along with the specifially "desired effect", for example the production of Bt-toxin. They are totally unpredictable, are little understood and may occur anywhere in the organism and may have completely unforeseeable consequences to the organism and the environment.

These effects are very well documented but have got little attention. The Nature Institute in New York has recently unveiled a website dedicated to a Non-target effects. Their conclusion is that for this reason only, genetic enginering is inherently unsafe. They write "Once it [the target effect phenomenon] is known, the frequently heard claim that genetic manipulation of organisms is a "precise science" without dramatic risks will either be voiced no more or will be recognized as dishonest."

For more, see Understanding the Nontarget Effects of Genetic Manipulation. at the Nature Institute website http://natureinstitute.org.

Related articles

• Crisis position  [EL] by professor Richard Strohman at University of California, Berkeley.

  Excerpt: "Genes exist in networks, interactive networks which have a logic of their own. The technology point of view does not deal with these networks. It simply addresses genes in isolation. But genes do not exist in isolation. And the fact that the industry folks don't deal with these networks is what makes their science incomplete and dangerous."

• The new understanding of genes  [ML] Dr. Jaan Suurküla. The theoretical basis of Genetic Engineering was created over 20 years ago. The present understanding of genetics is different in important respects...

To the source article "Does science have enough knowledge about DNA to be able to predict and master the effects of gene transfer?"  [ML]

"These findings demonstrate the fragmentary nature of current knowledge of genome structure and function and regulation of gene expression..."

Source: Visser, A. J. C. et al "Crops of uncertain nature?" "Plant Research International (No. 12, 2000) 70 pp.