Testbiotech EU Newsletter 1/2021 (January 2021)

EU Parliament votes against further approvals of GE plants - Testbiotech urges the EU Commission to take action
On 17 December, the EU Parliament adopted by a large majority several resolutions proposed by the Greens/EFA Group against further EU market approvals of genetically engineered plants. Five applications were filed by Bayer (Monsanto) and Syngenta for maize and soybeans that are resistant to herbicides and/or produce insecticides.
The EU Parliament has adopted more than 50 resolutions since December 2015 against new import approvals for GE plants. However, these votes are not binding for the EU Commission, which approved all of these GE plants for import. According to Testbiotech, the renewed strong evidence for huge gaps in EFSA risk assessment cannot be ignored in upcoming decision-making.
https://www.testbiotech.org/en/news/eu-parliament-votes-against-further-...
The Environmental Committee of the EU parliament had already adopted the resolutions two weeks before the vote: https://www.testbiotech.org/en/news/eu-close-approving-new-ge-plants

New report: Why New Genetic Engineering needs to be regulated - frequently asked questions about CRISPR & Co
In October, Testbiotech published a new report on New Genetic Engineering (New GE) that shows why these techniques need to be strictly regulated. New GE - or ‘genome editing’ - opens up new possibilities which go way beyond conventional breeding and previous methods of genetic engineering. One of the most important tools in this scenario are CRISPR/Cas gene scissors (nuclease). In contrast to chemical or physical mutagens used in conventional breeding, tools such as CRISPR/Cas can directly interact with biological mechanisms in the cells.
https://www.testbiotech.org/en/news/why-new-genetic-engineering-needs-be...

Are GE plants with Bt toxins 20 times more toxic than previously known? EFSA has for decades ignored crucial data from Monsanto
Data from Monsanto revealed that Bt proteins expressed in genetically engineered (GE) plants are significantly more toxic than natural Bt toxins. It is more than 30 years since, in 1990, Monsanto data first showed that if mixed with plant material from, e.g. soybeans, cotton and maize, toxicity could be up to 20 times higher. This is due to enzymes naturally present in the tissues of many crop plants. These findings were never taken into account by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). It seems as if EFSA simply overlooked the relevant publications. EFSA routinely accepts tests with isolated Bt proteins produced by bacteria to assess the risks of GE plants.
https://www.testbiotech.org/en/press-release/are-ge-plants-bt-toxins-20-...

EFSA consultations I: Mutagenic chain reaction cannot be sufficiently controlled - EFSA is disguising real risks of gene drive organisms
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has published the results of its public consultation on the risks of so-called gene drive organisms. Testbiotech is accusing the authority of disguising the real dimension of the risks. According to Testbiotech, EFSA refers to publications to describe these problems but fails to present the relevant findings correctly. Rather, EFSA compares gene drives to other methods, such as releases of sterile insects, which are not related to the mechanisms of a mutagenic chain reaction. Such comparisons are misleading and may cause the real risks to be underestimated.
Gene drives are designed to spread artificial genetic constructs throughout populations of wild species much faster than would be expected naturally. Currently, gene drives are being developed with the aid of tools such as the CRISPR/Cas gene scissors. There are plans, e.g. to apply gene drives in insects (flies and mosquitoes) or rodents (rats or mice). The aim is to replace or eradicate natural populations. Once started the process cannot be controlled effectively or reliably. The damage to humans, the environment and nature could be severe.
https://www.testbiotech.org/en/news/mutagenic-chain-reaction-cannot-be-s...
EFSA opinion: https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.6297
Outcome of the public consultation: https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/sp.efsa.2020.EN-1939

EFSA consultations II: Confusion about risks associated with New GE plants - Opinion of the EU authority insufficient and misleading
Testbiotech is extremely critical of a recent European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) opinion on the risks associated with plants derived from new genetic engineering (New GE). It considers the EFSA report on CRISPR & Co to be both inadequate and misleading on the protection of health and the environment.
In its opinion, EFSA claims that applications of gene scissors, such as CRISPR/Cas in plants, do not pose any specific risks as long as no additional genes are inserted. At the same time, EFSA agrees with Testbiotech that New GE opens up the way to new genetic combinations since it makes the whole genome accessible for changes caused, for example, by targeting several genes at once.
The EFSA opinion relates to techniques known as SDN-1 and SDN-2 (site-directed nucleases). These allow the genetic engineering of plants using gene scissors such as CRISPR/Cas without inserting additional genes.
https://www.testbiotech.org/en/news/efsa-confusion-about-risks-associate...
EFSA opinion: https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.6299
Outcome of the public consultation: https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/sp.efsa.2020.EN-1972

Testbiotech comment on EFSA opinion regarding insect‐resistant and herbicide‐tolerant soybean DAS-81419-2 × DAS-44406-6
In December, Testbiotech published a comment regarding EFSA’s opinion on soybean DAS-81419-2 × DAS-44406-6 by Dow Agrosciences. The soybean is resistant to glyphosate, 2,4-D and glufosinate ammonium. Further, it produces Bt toxins Cry1F and Cry1Ac. According to Testbiotech, the data presented are insufficient to demonstrate safety.
https://www.testbiotech.org/content/testbiotech-comment-efsa-opinion-soy...