Designer ice cream anyone?

[Guest guest]

http://www.asianpacificpost.com/portal2/ff8080810c6f217d010c829d899c0057_ice_cre\

am.do.html

 

 

 

 

Designer ice cream anyone?

Tue, July 18 2006

 

 

A new designer ice cream, made possible by genetic modification,

threatens to set off a " time bomb " in the health of British children,

scientists are warning.

 

The scientists, from Britain and Canada, have alerted an official

committee which this month will rule on the safety of the ice cream,

being sold increasingly worldwide by the food giant Unilever.

 

It contains an artificial protein copied, through a GM process, from a

fish living in the frigid waters of the bottom of the North-west Atlantic.

 

An " anti-freeze " protein allows the fish - the ocean pout - to survive

extreme cold.

 

Unilever, the world's biggest ice cream maker, says using its

artificial equivalent allows it " to produce products with more intense

flavour delivery, a wider range of novel textures and more intricate

shapes. "

 

Unilever also says it can improve the " healthiness " of the ice cream

by cutting its fat and sugar content - a claim that particularly

angers its critics, reported The Independent newspaper from the UK.

 

The scientists - Professor Malcolm Hooper, Emeritus Professor of

Medical Chemistry at Sunderland University, Professor Joe Cummins,

Emeritus Professor of Genetics at the University of Western Ontario,

and geneticist Dr Mae-Wan Ho, director of the Institute of Science in

Society - retort that it risks " letting off an immunological time bomb. "

 

The company, which has been making ice cream for more than 70 years

under such brands as Wall's, Magnum and Carte d'Or, and now owns Ben

and Jerry's, has sold it with the protein in the United States for

three years, and has approval to do so in Chile, Indonesia, Mexico and

the Philippines.

 

It has also had the go-ahead in Australia and New Zealand despite

objections by the health departments of the states of Victoria,

Queensland and New South Wales and the New Zealand Food Safety Authority.

 

Now it has applied to the Food Standards Agency to be allowed to use

it in " edible ices " sold in Britain, including sorbets, water ice,

fruit ice, frozen desserts, iced smoothies - and ice cream.

 

The agency's Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes is due to

consider the plea at its next meeting.

 

If the committee gives it the green light, as is likely, it will then

have to go to the European Union for approval, a lengthy process but

one also expected to give it the go-ahead. The new products could go

on sale in Britain in two years' time.

 

The key step in making the ice cream is getting hold of the ocean

pout's secret, called an ice-structuring protein because rather than

preventing freezing altogether, it lowers the temperature at which ice

crystals grow, and changes their shape and structure so that they do

less damage to living tissues.

 

In theory, Unilever could go out and catch loads of the fish - an

eel-like species that lives on the ocean floor - extract the protein

and add it to the ice cream like any other ingredient. But this would

be expensive and, as the company, which has a good record in combating

overfishing, points out, would cut the population of the fish, whose

stocks are already declining.

 

So it has resorted to a GM process already widely used to produce

vitamins and enzymes for food, including vegetarian cheese.

 

A synthetic gene for the protein is added by genetic modification to

bakers' yeast, which is fermented to manufacture more. The protein is

then extracted so that the final product does not contain any modified

yeast cells. This has led to a semantic battle over whether the final

product is " GM ice cream. " Unilever says that it is not; the

scientists maintain it is. " This is about as genetically modified a

product as you can get, " says Professor Cummins.

 

The more important debate is whether the end result is safe,

particularly for children. Unilever accepts that the main danger is

that people may prove allergic to the protein. But it points out that

people have eaten its natural form in ocean pout for decades, and says

that the artificial version is identical. It adds that extensive tests

on the artificial protein for allergic effects gave it the all clear.

 

Unexpectedly perhaps, many of the most prominent anti-GM pressure

groups, including Friends of the Earth, GM Freeze, and Genewatch, say,

in effect, that they are not too bothered, and that it is well down

their priority list. But the scientists, who have a record of GM

scepticism, are deeply disturbed, as is The Soil Association.

 

The scientists insist that the protein is changed in the processing,

and may pose a danger. Professor Hooper told The Independent recently:

" This is a novel protein manufactured by genetically modified

organisms and its characteristics have never been fully evaluated. It

needs to be checked out before it is widely introduced into the human

diet. "

 

He and his colleagues also dispute the adequacy of Unilever's safety

checks, not least because it checked the protein against the blood of

people allergic to cod, not the pout fish,

 

The Soil Association calls the ice cream " a frivolous application of a

dangerous and unwanted technology. "

 

It adds: " Just because there won't be any traces of the GM material in

the ice cream does not mean that the product is safe. It certainly

should not be marketed as a `healthier alternative' simply on the

grounds that it is low fat. "

 

The Soil Association says research shows that " genetic engineering

produces a range of unpredictable biological side-effects. " This

includes, it is believed, " new toxins and allergens even if the

original GM material is absent. "

 

It points to a GM food supplement, L-tryptophan, which " killed over 37

people and disabled over 1,500 others " in the US in 1989 even though

it also " did not contain any GM material in the final product. "

 

Unilever responded to The Independent report saying: " This is an

exciting new technology that has potential benefits for ice cream,

including the possibility of increased fruit content and lower fat

content. The process itself is widely used within the food industry,

but the Food Standards Agency process is designed to solicit opinion

from others and we would not want to influence that process whilst it

is still running its course. "

 

The row comes as the biotech industry is attempting a comeback with

the help of the European Commission.

 

Modified products were swept from the shelves in the face of public

refusal to buy them, and the EU instituted a six-year moratorium on

approving new ones.

 

But this came to an end two years ago and biotech firms have jumped

in. Adrian Bebb of Friends of the Earth says: " Their latest tactic is

to swamp committees with dozens of applications for new GM foods. It

is hard to imagine that the scientists working for these committees

will be able to pay as much attention to their safety as they merit. "

 

EU governments are deadlocked on the applications but, under the

rules, the pro-GM European Commission then nods them through. Seven

different types of GM maize have been approved for food in the past

two years: applications for GM rice, sugar beet and potato are in the

pipeline.

 

But there is no sign of them appearing on British supermarket shelves

- because most still refuse to buy GM food.