Groups demand that the Commission withdraw the proposal for deregulation of NGT plants

Today, several civil society organisations (CSOs) – including GMWatch – and industry associations published a joint letter to the European Commission, demanding that they withdraw their proposal for deregulation of plants obtained from new genetic engineering (new genomic techniques, NGTs). They stress that any new regulation for NGT plants must be based on science and ensure safety. In this regard, the proposal made by the Commission suffers from irreparable flaws, since the criteria for speeding up market access are not science-based, but arbitrary.

The organisations warn that, with new genetic engineering methods and tools such as the CRISPR/Cas gene scissors, the technical potential, but also the potential damage, has grown rapidly. These tools make it possible, for the first time, to genetically engineer every gene of every life form and to spread these genetic changes within the respective species. This technical potential has also to be taken into account in future regulation of NGT plants.

In addition, many experts warn against the risks of convergence of artificial intelligence (AI) and genetic engineering. AI can be used, for example, to create new gene variants and gene combinations and release many genetically engineered organisms within short periods of time. All applications of genetic engineering can be involved, from NGT plants and animals up to the creation of new pathogenic viruses.

Astrid Österreicher, Testbiotech’s policy advisor in Brussels, who helped to organise the joint letter, said, “In regard to future applications of NGTs, we currently only see the tip of the iceberg ahead. We have to make sure we do not head straight into it. Decision makers have to remember the lessons learnt from the Titanic: We should always listen to those in the masthead basket using their binoculars. Do not trust in experts telling you the ship cannot sink!”

However, Testbiotech points out, the Commission, by ignoring these developments, is proposing a general deregulation of NGT plants. They propose a ‘category 1’ to ease market access for NGT plants that are deemed to be equivalent to conventional plants. NGT plants belonging to this category would not have to undergo any risk assessment before they are released in the environment or commercialised, and would be exempted from post-market monitoring. The basic concept is simple. In short, up to 20 genetic changes would be allowed, with each of them encompassing, for instance, up to 20 changes of nucleotides. However, there is no scientific rationale behind such a "magic threshold" for safety.

Testbiotech says: "As proposed, the criteria for NGT category 1 plants completely ignore a broad range of evidence showing that even a small number of changes in the plants’ genome can lead to life forms with new characteristics that differ significantly from those resulting from conventional breeding or those found in natural populations. Without taking this into account, the risks of NGTs for environment and health cannot be evaluated properly. Amongst others, possible negative consequences can concern crucial ecosystem functions such as the interaction between plants and pollinators, soil organisms and the food web above and below the ground. Any of these risks can escape risk assessment if the criteria as proposed by the Commission would be applied.

"The letter is made public just 50 years after, in February 1975, scientists from all over the world gathered in Asilomar (California) for the 'Conference on Recombinant DNA' to discuss the risks and regulation of genetic engineering. The situation was similar to today: some of the experts called for a cautious approach to genetic engineering, while others were already registering the first patents and launching a competition for the commercial exploitation of genetically engineered organisms.

"Against this background, the CSOs demand that the EU should not deregulate NGT plants, micro-organisms and animals. Instead, the implementing measures of the current GMO regulation should be adapted to current developments so that the pace and consequences of development do not get out of control. They therefore demand the European Commission to withdraw its NGT proposal."

Source: Testbiotech