Food Functionality and GM crops - is this the future of healthy and sustainable foods?
Functional foods first appeared in Japan in the 1980s to cope with rising healthcare costs (Henry, 2010) where studies were undertaken to understand more about food structure, its role in the body and how it can help prevent diseases (Arai, 1996). This allowed the development of functional foods for consumers to eat well and healthily. In 1991, a policy was introduced where a selected number of functional foods ‘for specified health uses’ (Arai, 1996) were approved by the government and distributed to the public. These include the addition of casein peptide and lactoferrin to milk to increase the antibacterial effects so that bodily systems such as the immune system can be improved. So far, Japan remains the only country to recognise functional foods as a separate category known as ‘foods for specified health use (FOSHU) (Henry, 2010) and around 500 food products have been granted this status for their benefits to health (Henry, 2010). Whilst research is available about the benefits of functional foods, one must also think about the sustainability and its stance with the public (Sibbel, 2007).
Despite the targeted benefits of functional foods, it can only be reaped if everyone has a consistent work-life balance that allows for time to buy and prepare foods based on targeted dietary recommendations and an active lifestyle (Mogelonsky, 1999). Regulatory standards are required to ensure that everyone is getting the same benefits with manufacturers ensuring that they are aware of the potential commercial opportunity of functional foods (Katan and ROOS, 2004). This cannot be controlled if functional foods are not regulated or if there are no strict standards as to what counts as functional foods. For example, the 2006 EU Regulation for functional foods is based on the current research market (Moors, 2012) and all health claims on functional foods need to be assessed well before being available commercially. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) assesses all health claims and a decision is made by the European Commission based on the findings of EFSA (Moors, 2012). Companies that produce functional foods can use the health claims to differentiate their products on the consumer market in order to add value and have success against competition (Moors, 2012). This in turn lets consumers know that rigorous testing has been done to ensure public safety is held to the utmost standard. But the cost of developing and submitting a health claim can prove to be more expensive than developing the innovative product. This is not sustainable for smaller companies if the cost of applying for approval is more than that of the return.
The amount of approved EFSA claims dictates the competitive landscape and if most claims are rejected on the basis of lack of evidence or research, then it is possible that the functional foods development may cease to exist. As such, companies can be discouraged from developing new claims of functional foods and any long-term public health effects of these foods such as lowering blood cholesterol may not be monitored continuously meaning that consumers can falsely led. The expense of submitting an EFSA claim has allowed the functional food landscape to be dominated by large multi-million companies who have the financial resources to make a loss. As such, consumers have developed a mentality that products from these companies provide sufficient nutrients for healthy eating when actually these companies have the monopoly of the market which to increase their chances of success (Moors, 2012). This also makes the general public vary of new foods and companies and more research is needed to change their ways. A healthy competition is needed to ensure that a wide range of products is available in the market but such is the influence of regulations, that smaller companies have to rethink strategies to avoid bankruptcy.
One strategy is to potentially invest in GM crops. Factors such as climate change and growing population numbers are causing a rethink in developing sustainable agricultural practices whilst providing nutritious food. One of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal goals is to ‘End Hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture’ (UN, 2021) by 2030. This goal is based on the global data where around 650 million people are malnourished as a result of food insecurity in 2019 (UN, 2021). To provide food for the increasing population, we need to have better plant and animal breeding programmes, improve yield production and nutrition and reduce crop loss from factors such as diseases and climate change (Oliver, 2014). One way is to use genetic engineering technology to create Genetically Modified (GM) Crops whereby new genes are introduced into crops. These genes have been altered to tolerate pests, herbicides, drought and improves plant growth which in turn has led to a mass production of GM crops worldwide especially in developing countries like India and Ghana (Azadi et al., 2015). Popular crops include soybeans, rice and cotton that have been modified and planted in many countries, where these plants have been grown for centuries, and have been a cost-effective solution for struggling farmers. For example, between 1999 to 20001, South African farmers have achieved yields of 7% to 12% with the cultivated GM Bt maize as compared to conventional ones (Azadi et al., 2015) with similar reports in countries such as Spain and India.
One could argue that GM crops have been in production for centuries thanks to farming practices that involved selectively breeding crops and animals for popular traits such as better-quality fleece and meat (Oliver, 2014, Azadi et al., 2015) but these practices did not account for drastic weather changes that have occurred over the centuries. In terms of nutrition, one GM crop in particular stands out due to its medical importance (Stone and Glover, 2017) and that is Golden Rice. Golden rice has been biosynthesised to produce beta-carotene, a vitamin A precursor, in the endosperm of the rice as opposed to the bran (Stone and Glover, 2017). Golden rice has had great success in reducing vitamin A deficiency (VAD) rates, an illness that can cause blindness or even death in malnourished children, in the Philippines and as such has been approved for use by the government (Stone and Glover, 2017). Similar results for VAD reduction in children were also found in India (Stein et al., 2008). Golden rice is unlikely to ever completely eradicate the consequences of VAD such as permanent blindness but can help reduce health costs, suffering and could potentially benefit the whole world if enough investment is given to the technology (Qaim, 2010). Similar research has also been used on wheat lines to express the genes Nicotianamine Synthase 2 (OsNAS2) and Ferritin PyFerritine in order minimise iron loss in the milling process. This greatly increases the iron bioavailability in the body by at least 30% (Singh et al, 2017) thus potentially reducing iron deficiency problems. However further testing for iron bioavailability in GM wheat is required for regulation purposes as current EU guidelines mean that GM wheat have limited acceptability rates (Smyth, 2017). In the UK, GM foods are assessed by the Food Standards Agency with the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes (ACNFP) and are only authorised for sale using a strict-criteria and labelling to ensure that consumers are not misled (Food Agency, 2021).
GM crops are considered functional foods as they are designed to bring nutrients to the body and have the ability to survive harsh environments and pests whilst promoting high agricultural yields at lower costs for farmers (Qaim, 2010). However, public support and efficient regulations are needed to further the benefits of GM crops at a large scale (Qaim and Kouser, 2013) and is dependent on policy, cultural diversity and public opinion across the globe (Sibbel, 2007). Countries where GM crops and functional foods have enjoyed great success are developing countries or countries where these foods have been marketed heavily (Stein et al., 2008) with proven positive health results. Farmers have been alleviated out of poverty (Qaim, 2010), food security is improving (Qaim and Kouser, 2013) and health benefits have made a remarkable impact on life (Henry, 2010) thanks to the functionality of GM crops. However, no-one can statistically prove or disprove these foods until the long term benefits of functional foods are seen and this is down to research and marketing (Hudson, 2017). And as such we need longitudinal studies to ensure that functional foods are sustainable and beneficial in the long run without further negative consequences on the earth and the human body.
References
- ARAI, S. 1996. Studies on functional foods in Japan—state of the art. Bioscience, biotechnology, and biochemistry, 60, 9-15.
- AZADI, H., GHANIAN, M., GHOOCHANI, O. M., RAFIAANI, P., TANING, C. N. T., HAJIVAND, R. Y. & DOGOT, T. 2015. Genetically Modified Crops: Towards Agricultural Growth, Agricultural Development, or Agricultural Sustainability? Food Reviews International, 31, 195-221.
- HENRY, C. J. 2010. Functional foods. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 64, 657-659.
- HUDSON, J. 2017. Genetically modified products and GMO foods: a game of chance? Developing New Functional Food and Nutraceutical Products. Elsevier.
- KATAN, M. B. & ROOS, N. M. 2004. Promises and problems of functional foods. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 44, 369-377.
- MOGELONSKY, M. 1999. Functional foods. American Demographics, 21, 15-16.
- MOORS, E. H. 2012. Functional foods: regulation and innovations in the EU. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 25, 424-440.
- OLIVER, M. J. 2014. Why we need GMO crops in agriculture. Missouri medicine, 111, 492.
- QAIM, M. 2010. Benefits of genetically modified crops for the poor: household income, nutrition, and health. New Biotechnology, 27, 552-557.
- QAIM, M. & KOUSER, S. 2013. Genetically modified crops and food security. PloS one, 8, e64879.
- SIBBEL, A. 2007. The sustainability of functional foods. Social Science & Medicine, 64, 554- 561. SMYTH, S. J. 2017. Genetically modified crops, regulatory delays, and international trade. Food and Energy Security, 6, 78-86.
- SPIERTZ, H. 2010. Food production, crops and sustainability: restoring confidence in science and technology. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2, 439-443.
- STEIN, A. J., SACHDEV, H. & QAIM, M. 2008. Genetic engineering for the poor: Golden Rice and public health in India. World Development, 36, 144-158.
- STONE, G. D. & GLOVER, D. 2017. Disembedding grain: Golden Rice, the Green Revolution, and heirloom seeds in the Philippines. Agriculture and Human Values, 34, 87-102
Comments
Post a Comment