Gene editing could increase food security, UK adviser says

A scientific adviser to the UK government said that genes could increase global food security and reduce reliance on pesticides.

Speaking before the introduction of a bill on genetic technologies to the House of Lords on Wednesday, Prof Gideon Henderson said the legislation aimed to create a simpler regulatory framework that would speed up the development and commercialisation of gene-edited products by allowing them to be treated differently to genetically modified organisms.

The bill will allow precision-bred crops to navigate the regulatory system much more quickly than they are currently able to.

Henderson said that this could have many benefits, from building crops that are more resistant to the climate crisis, pests and diseases, to increasing crop yields, which could help to combat global hunger. It could be used to make more healthy crops, such as tomatoes.

Once a regulatory system has been developed to safeguard animal welfare, the bill will allow for similar changes for livestock to follow, for example preventing the creation of fast-growing animals that are unable to stand.

It distinguishes between genetic modification, which involves introducing genes from other species, andprecision breeding, which involves creating desirable traits. The latter uses gene editing to make changes that mimic the process of breeding, only more precisely and quickly than traditional breeding would allow.

Environmental groups dismissed the distinction between the two as PR spin. Kierra Box, of Friends of the Earth, said: "Gene editing is genetic modification by a different name." It still focuses on altering the genetic code of plants and animals to deal with the problems caused by poor soils, over-use of pesticides and intensive farming.

Food labelling is an issue. If the bill is passed, it will apply only to England, which could cause conflicts with the Scottish and Welsh governments, which are maintaining a ban on genetically modified crops.

The director of the campaign group GM Freeze raised concern that the bill would lead to the removal of labels that allow consumers to choose what they are buying and eating. There is currently no plan to introduce a labelling system for gene-edited products.

The government prioritised technological solutions to the food crisis over strategies targeting unhealthy diet, a lack of crop diversity, farm animal overcrowding and the decline in beneficial insects according to the Soil Association.

David Rose, a professor of sustainable agricultural systems at Cranfield University, said that gene editing has the potential to address food production and environmental challenges.

There are legitimate concerns about the potential for gene editing to consolidate power inequalities in the food supply chain, ethical concerns about usage in animals, and the potential to facilitate greater intensification of farming which could harm the environment.

The bill could have gone even further. The proposed changes in regulation of gene-edited crops are a positive step in the right direction and will align the UK better with regulations outside the EU, said Prof Jonathan Jones, a plant scientist at the Sainsbury Laboratory.