Secretary
Ministry of Health and Indigenous Medicine
"Suwasiripaya"
385 Wimalawansa Mawatha,
Colombo, 10, Sri Lanka.
E-mail: sechim@sltnet.lk
Cc: President Chandrika Kumaratunga, Republic of Sri Lanka
The Honorable John Seneviratne, Minister of Health, Ministry of Health
and Indigenous Medicine
August 21, 2001
Dear Sir,
GM technology is overwhelmingly rejected by citizens all over the world
as a dangerous technology in the service of corporations and acting
against the common good. Sri Lanka has inspired the world for her
intellectual and moral leadership in banning GMOs. In the United
Kingdom and a growing number of other countries, there is widespread
civil disobedience action against GM field trials, which is set to
escalate until and unless their government responds by following your
example. Please do not reverse your decision to impose the ban from 1
September 2001.
As a geneticist and biophysicist with more than 30 years experience in
research and teaching in universities, I was drawn into the genetic
engineering debate in 1994 as scientific advisor to the Third World
Network.
I have since debated and lectured in 30 countries around the world. I
am also Director of the Institute of Science in Society (ISIS), which I
co-founded in 1999 to promote socially accountable and ecologically
sustainable science, and the critical public understanding of science.
I have close to 300 publications, including 10 books spanning several
disciplines, among which is Genetic Engineering Dream or Nightmare?
(1998, 1999), translated into several languages.
ISIS initiated an Open Letter in 1999, calling for a global moratorium
on environmental releases of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), on
grounds that they are inherently unsafe, and for a ban on patents on
living organisms and processes, on grounds that they are unethical and
do not constitute inventions. The letter has been signed by more than
450 scientists from 56 countries so far, and is on our website
(http://www.i-sis.org). You may recognise many eminent scientists of
international repute among the list of signatories.
A major part of our work is in monitoring the scientific literature to
provide accessible information to policy makers and the general public,
especially with regard to GMO biosafety. There is currently no
independent scientific body, apart from ISIS, that is performing this
important task.
It has become increasingly evident that GM technology is inherently
hazardous and unreliable both in agriculture and in medicine. The list
of failures is growing apace. Let me mention a few recent examples that
came to light within the past year.
GM crops are genetically unstable, and this is fully borne out by
numerous new scientific publications [1]. Even the top 'success',
Roundup Ready soya, is showing every sign of breakdown: reduced yield,
non-germination, diseases and infestation by new pests [2]. Molecular
genetic characterisation, the first ever done on any commercially grown
GM crop so far, has confirmed that both the GM construct of Roundup
Ready soya and the host genome have been scrambled (rearranged), and
hundreds of basepairs of unknown DNA has got in as well [3].
GMO instability is now admitted in a research report posted by the
European Commission on its website:
"Biotechnology relies to a large extent on our ability to introduce
foreign genes into cells. A major problem with present day technology
is the non-predictability of the integration of such transgenes. DNA
introduced into plant cells mostly integrates at random, i.e. at nonpredetermined positions of the genome. The biological process
ultimately responsible for random integration is known as illegitimate
recombination. DNA integrated at random frequently contains multiply
copies and often copies are scrambled. Multiple copies also often
induce gene silencing and hence instability in the expression of the
introduced genes.
In addition, the DNA integrates at loci of unknown stability and
capacity for expression of randomly integrated copies may induce
unpredictable and undesirable mutations in the host genome.. we still
lack the knowledge for precision engineering of plants' genes." [4].
The 'next generation' crops are worse. I draw your attention especially
to those developed with 'terminator technologies' aimed at protecting
corporate patents and preventing farmers from saving and replanting
seeds. Many are currently field tested and commercially grown as 'male
sterile' crops. Not only are the constructs more complicated and hence
more unstable and prone to horizontal gene transfer, the gene products
used are cell poisons or recombinases, ie, genome scramblers. Femalesterile and even male-sterile genes (yes!) are being spread via pollen
[5]. These dangerous genes will spread and wipe out other crops as well
as wild plant species.
It has become all too clear that GM agriculture cannot co-exist with
other forms of agriculture. Bees are known to travel up to10km or more
in foraging for pollen [6]. And there is no way to prevent the
horizontal spread of GM constructs to unrelated species, which can
occur in all environments, including the digestive and respiratory
tracts of animals [7]. There are both sound a priori reasons as well as
empirical evidence to support my contention, shared by other
scientists, that GM constructs may more likely spread horizontally than
non-manipulated DNA.
GM constructs are designed to cross species barriers and invade
genomes. They possess homologies to a wide combination of viral and
bacterial DNA and are hence much more likely to recombine with, and
transfer genes to all those agents. GM constructs are well known to be
structurally unstable and hence prone to fragment and recombine. Some
constructs such as those with the CaMV 35S promoter are extra unstable
on account of the presence of recombination hotspots.
I have mentioned the now abundant empirical evidence of structural
instability of transgenic DNA and trangenic plants above. The CaMV 35S
promoter has been shown to be extra unstable in GM crops. And
horizontal transfer of transgenic DNA has been demonstrated both in the
laboratory and in the field.
Proponents of GM technology had attempted to refute our warnings about
the CaMV 35S promoter [8]. But they have failed to counter our point
that the isolated, recombined CaMV 35S promoter cannot be equated with
the promoter in the intact viral genome or the intact virus.
The intact viral genome had evolved over millions of years. The host
range of the virus itself is restricted to the cabbage family, and it
has a well-tried and tested life cycle in the host cell that does not
require integration into the host genome [9].
The fact that no transfer from the virus into the plant genome has
taken place in the course of evolution attests to the effective
biological barriers that keep species distinct.
The same promoter, removed from the viral genome and put next to
strange genes in the GM construct, is entirely different. It now
functions promiscuously across the living world, including animal and
human cells [10]. Its destabilising effect on GM crops is such that
many scientists, including those who pioneered its use, are now phasing
it out. But CaMV 35S promoter is still in practically all GM crops
commercially grown or undergoing field trials. Sri Lanka is extremely
wise not to let any into her soil.
Apart from the CaMV 35S promoter, many crops also contain antibiotic
resistance marker genes. Monsanto's GM cottons contain an antibiotic
resistance marker gene that UK Government scientists have warned
against, on account of its serious implications for the treatment of
gonorrhea [11].
Another, the kanamycin resistance marker gene, is widely used. The
approval of this marker gene was a regulatory blunder committed in the
United States and elsewhere, as it is clear that kanamycin is still in
clinical use, and the marker gene confers resistance to new generation
aminoglycosides as well [12]. European regulators are now agreed that
antibiotic resistance marker genes should be phased out by 2004,
because they can spread to pathogenic bacteria, making life-threatening
diseases potentially untreatable.
There is also plenty of evidence that GM crops with viral genes are
prone to give rise to recombinant viruses, some of which more virulent
than the 'wild type' [9].
When I first drew attention to horizontal gene transfer in 1995,
proponents of GM technology reacted by denying it exists. Now they are
saying it does not matter because it is a natural process. Horizontal
gene transfer may have occurred in our evolutionary past, but GM
constructs are anything but natural. They are synthetic genes and new
combinations of genes that have never existed in billions of years of
evolution, and cannot in any sense be regarded as natural.
And, I am afraid, the GM proponents will have to change their tune
again; for a rigorous reanalysis of the human genome and other data has
failed to substantiate the claim that the human genome has 113 to 226
bacterial genes transferred into it [13]. The actual number could well
be no more than a few, or none at all.
What is the lesson? Precisely as I have always said, horizontal gene
transfer does not readily happen without genetic engineering. Genetic
engineering enhances it, with dangerous consequences. The possibility
of horizontal gene transfer, too, is now admitted in a research report
posted by the European Commission.
The study notes that the risks of "horizontal gene transfer cannot be
excluded. Free DNA persists in some materials for weeks, and
furthermore, some bacteria develop natural/chemical competence to take
up DNA from the environment. In addition, in the gastrointestinal
tract of man and husbandry animals, DNA may remain stable for some
time, particularly in the colon." [14].
In biomedical applications, the GM gene-centred approach is equally
misplaced and pernicious [15]. So-called 'health genomics' is a drain
on our intellectual and financial resources. It is preventing us from
addressing the real, overwhelming causes of ill health: poverty,
malnutrition, social injustice and environmental pollution. It is
stigmatising and victimising those most in need of care and treatment,
and making even the most unethical applications, such as human cloning
and 'therapeutic human cloning', seem compelling.
Furthermore, the 'cures' on offer are literally deadly. The toll from
'gene therapy' trials so far is at least 6 deaths and more than 650
adverse events. It is now admitted that gene therapy has been oversold
by the scientists themselves [16]. Presumed stem cells from human
fetuses transplanted into the brain of 5 Parkinson's patients turned
into an irredeemable nightmare because the cells grew uncontrollably
[17]. The latest verdict from an international team of cloners is that
mice embryonic stem cells are uncontrollably variable in culture, the
clones themselves are also subject to uncontrollable and unpredictable
variations and defects [18].
And xenotransplantation is widely condemned because there is clear
evidence that endogenous viruses from animal organs can cross into
humans [19].
New lethal viruses continue to be created in genetic engineering labs,
some of the latest being SHIVs, hybrids of human and monkey AIDS
viruses that can infect both [20]. Finally, AIDS virologists have
issued serious warning against AIDS vaccines that undermine the immune
system, making it more susceptible to viral infections, and have the
potential to generate lethal viruses and bacteria in the vaccinated
populations [21].
A sweeping paradigm change is long overdue if we are to survive the
destruction that reductionist science and technology have wrought on us
and on our planet. We have all the means to deliver genuine health and
food security to the world without using GM technology and going
against the wishes of the vast majority of people. Among the most
important means, as you know, are indigenous health and agricultural
systems that urgently need to be revitalised and protected from
corporate biopiracy.
I thank your Government for standing up for the people of the world.
Yours sincerely,
Dr. Mae-Wan Ho
Director,
Institute of Science in Society
PO Box 32097
London NW1 0XR
UK
e-mail: m.w.ho@I-sis.org
1. Reviewed in "GM crops face potential genetic meltdown" by Joe
Cummins, ISIS News 9/10, July 2001 ISSN: 1474-1547 (print) ISSN:
1474-1814 (online) www.i-sis.org enclosed
2. "Bad news beans - A year of challenges confronts soybean growers"
Duane Daily, Extension & Ag. Information, University of Missouri,
July 27, 2001 DailyF@missouri.edu
3. Windels P, Taverniers I, Depicker A, Van Bockstaele E and De Loose M
(2001). Characterisation of the Roundup Ready soybean insert. Eur Food
Res Technol DOI 10.1007/ s002170100336, © Springer-Verlag, reviewed in
"Scrambled genome of RR soya" by Mae-Wan Ho and Joe cummins, ISIS News
9/10, July 2001 ISSN: 1474-1547 (print) ISSN: 1474-1814 (online) www.isis.org enclosed.
4. http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/quality-of-life/gmo/01-plants/01-14-project.html
5. The various terminator patents have been decoded in "Terminate the
terminators" by Mae-Wan Ho and Joe Cummins, ISIS Report, July 23, 2001
<www.i-sis.org, enclosed.
6. Capaldi E.A. et al (2000) Ontogeny of orientation flight in the
honeybee revealed by harmonic radar, Nature, Vol 403, p 537-40.
Quote from this paper:
"Our findings suggest that bees take multiply orientation flights
before becoming foragers in order to visit different, and larger,
portions of the landscape around the hive. These flights provide them
with repeated opportunities to view the hive and its surroundings from
different positions, suggesting that bees learn the local landscape in
a progressive fashion. Bees navigate using a combination of cues,
including the position of the sun and the location of salient landscape
features, but it is not known how or whether information about these
cues, obtained during sequential flights, is integrated. It is an
extraordinary feat for an animal the size of a honeybee to be able to
find a small nest from distances as great as 10 km.."
7. Reviewed in Ho MW. Horizontal Gene Transfer - Hidden Hazards of
Genetic Engineering, Third World Network Biotechnology Series, Penang,
2001 www.i-sis.org
8. Ho MW, Ryan A and Cummins J. The cauliflower mosaic viral promoter,
a recipe for disaster? Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease 1999:
11: 194-197.
9. Ho MW, Ryan A and Cummins J. Hazards of transgenic plants with the
cauliflower mosaic viral promoter. Microbial Ecology in Health and
Disease 2000, 12, 6-11.
10. Ho MW, Ryan A and Cummins J. CaMV 35S promoter fragmentation
hotspot confirmed and it is active in animals. Microbial Ecology in
Health and Disease 2000: 13:
11. See "Monsanto's GM cotton & gonorrhea" by Mae-Wan Ho, ISIS News 7/8
ISSN: 1474-1547 (print) ISSN: 1474-1814 (online) www.i-sis.org enclosed
12. "Kanamycin still in use and cross reacts" by Joe Cummins, ISIS
News 9/10, July 2001 ISSN: 1474-1547 (print) ISSN: 1474-1814 (online)
www.i-sis.org enclosed.
13. Stanhope MJ, Lupas A, Italia MJ, Koretke, KK, Volker C and Brown
JR. Phylogenetic analyses do not support horizontal gene transfers from
bacteria to vertebrates. Nature, 2001, 412, 940-4.
14. http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/quality-of-life/gmo/04-food/04-07-project .html
15. Ho MW. Health genomics and health policy., Paper presented at WHOMulti Regional Meeting on Genomics and Health, Bangkok, Thailand, 23-25
July, 2001, enclosed.
16. See "Gene therapy oversold by scientists" by Angela Ryan, ISIS News
9/10, July 2001 ISSN: 1474-1547 (print) ISSN: 1474-1814 (online)
www.i-sis.org enclosed
17. "Cell implants in Parkinson's study cause catastrophe" by Gina
Kolata, International Herald Tribune, 9 March 2001.
18. Reviewed in "Cloning and ES cells both biting the dust" by Mae-Wan
Ho, ISIS Report, July 11, 2001 www.i-sis.org enclosed.
19. Ho MW and Cummins JC. Xenotransplantation. How bad science and big
business put the world at risk from viral pandemics. ISIS Sustainable
Science Audit no.2, August 2000 www.i-sis.org ; also Third World
Resurgence 2001, 127/128, 46-55, enclosed.
20. See "GM AIDS virus more deadly" by Joe Cummins and Mae-Wan Ho, ISIS
Report July 19, 2001 www.i-sis.org enclosed.
21. See "AIDS vaccines trials dangerous" by Mae-Wan Ho, ISIS Report
July 29, 2001 www.i-sis.org enclosed.
Enclosures:
1. ISIS News 9/10
2. "Terminate the terminators", by Mae-Wan Ho and Joe Cummins, ISIS
Report July 23, 2001.
3. Health genomics and health policy. Paper presented at WHO- Multi
Regional Meeting on Genomics and Health, Bangkok, Thailand, 23-25 July,
2001.
4. "Cloning and ES cells both biting the dust", by Mae-Wan Ho, ISIS
Report, July 11, 2001.
5. Xenotransplantation. How bad science and big business put the world
at risk from viral pandemics. ISIS Sustainable Science Audit no.2, by
Mae-Wan Ho and Joe Cummins, August 2000.
6. "GM AIDS virus more deadly", by Joe Cummins and Mae-Wan Ho, ISIS
Report July 19, 2001.
7. "AIDS vaccines trials dangerous" by Mae-Wan Ho, ISIS Report July 29,
2001.
8. "Monsanto's GM cotton & gonnorhea" by Mae-Wan Ho, ISIS News 7/8.