Local Authority Overseeing GM Foods in Singapore

Local Authority Overseeing GM Foods in Singapore

About GMAC
http://www.gmac.gov.sg/

The Genetic Modification Advisory Committee (GMAC), a non-profit, multi-agency advisory committee was set up in April 1999 to oversee and advise on the research and development, production, use, handling and release of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), ensuring that these are done in compliance with international standards. GMAC will continue to develop and approve biosafety guidelines regarding GMOs, as well as facilitate the harmonisation of guidelines with international authorities. GMAC has, since, expanded its role to take on creation and enhancement of public awareness on GMOs and GM-related issues.

The objective of this committee was to ensure public safety while allowing for the commercial use of GMOs and GMO-derived products by companies and research institutions, in compliance with international standards.

Biosafety Guidelines for Agriculture-related GMOs

GMAC also promulgates a number of guidelines for the production and distribution of GM foods.
These guidelines are accompanied by several Appendices:

Appendix 1
Questionaire for Risk Assessment of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)
Appendix 2
Risk Assessment Criteria
Appendix 3
Flow Chart for Evaluation, Approval and Registration of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) Related to Agriculture

Below are the objectives of the guidelines:

OBJECTIVES OF GUIDELINES

1.1 These Guidelines are established to ensure the safe movement and use in Singapore
of agriculture-related GMOs.

1.2 These Guidelines provide a common framework for:(a) assessment of risks of agriculture-related GMOs to human health and the
environment; and

(b) approval mechanisms for their release in Singapore.

1.3 These Guidelines address issues related to food safety based on the concept of
substantial equivalence.


Media

In addition to its role as a regulatory organisation, GMAC conducts surveys and frequently distributes press releases to media to inform the public on the latest news related to genetically modified foods. Also, Committee members of GMAC sometimes contribute to forum articles. Placed below are some of the feature news items:

GMAC, 25 Jan 2007

Survey indicated Singaporeans’ Knowledge And Attitudes Towards Genetically Modification has improved slightly since 2001.

Results of a nation-wide survey found that although less Singaporeans have heard of the term “genetic modification”, those who have, are more informed and hold less misconceptions about the subject matter compared to four years.

In May 2005, the Genetic Modification Advisory Committee (GMAC) commissioned a nation-wide survey to understand Singaporean’s knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of genetic modification technology. Conducted by NUS Consulting, this survey is a follow-up of a similar survey conducted four years ago in May 2001.

Data was collected through interviews of 600 Singaporean adults at public places such as shopping centres, MRT stations, bus interchanges and libraries in different parts of Singapore.
The survey, conducted by NUS Consulting, found that 40% of Singaporeans have heard of the term “genetic modification” compared to 50% in 2001. Amongst the respondents who have heard of the term “genetic modification”, almost one-half understood the terminology and basic concepts, a slight improvement from one-third in 2001.

About 20% of respondents thought that eating genetically modified foods could change a person’s genes and about 34% of respondents thought that the human body cannot digest DNA or genes.

Among those that have heard of the term “genetic modification”, attitudes towards genetically modified foods were favorable. More than two-thirds believe the technology would increase food production and confer benefits to the farmers. Just as many would be willing to buy genetically modified foods if they offer tangible benefits such as better appearance, lower price or improved taste.

Less than 8% of the respondents who have heard of the term “genetic modification” believe that GM foods do not confer any benefits at all.

Most of the people interviewed reported learning about genetically modified foods from media such as newspapers, TV, magazines and radio. Just as in the 2001 survey, Singaporeans strongly believe that the Singapore government can be trusted to ensure that GM foods sold here is safe for consumption. They also place great trust in information from doctors, nutritionists and scientists.

It was also found that males, Singaporeans with higher educational levels and those who access the internet frequently tend to have a higher awareness of genetic modification technology. However, those with higher education tend to believe less in the media. Religious background and income do not make significant differences to attitudes.
Since 2001, GMAC through its Subcommittee on Public Awareness, had established several initiatives as part of its public awareness programme. This included:

(a) publishing a website, http://www.gmac.gov.sg/, featuring frequently asked questions, GM-related guidelines and links to several relevant regional and international educational sites,
(b) organizing public forums;
(c) conducting talks and giving interviews to schools, media and civic organizations; and
(d) producing graphics-intensive, easy-to-read brochures on GMOs and GM Foods, targeted at the laymen.

In response to the results of the survey and recognising the importance of nurturing an informed and educated society who would be able to separate facts from myths, GMAC would continue in its efforts to communicate with the public through existing platforms and programs.

The Straits Times Forum Page, 9 Jun 2004
Health and environment the main concern

WE REFER to Dr Andy Ho's commentary, 'Frankenfoods - we need to know' (ST, May 29), and the letters, 'Labelling GM food not easy' (ST, June 1) and 'Don't duck tough questions about GM food' (ST, June 4), from Mr Alvin Loo Eng Kiat and Mr Daniel Koh Kah Soon respectively.
Labelling does, indeed, provide consumers with the information to make choices. However, as Mr Loo pointed out, the issue is not a simple one. There are two key issues that need to be considered before an effective labelling programme can be implemented, such as which types of foods are to be labelled and the determining of threshold levels. We also need to factor in the requirement that any such programme must be scientifically based so as not to fall afoul of World Trade Organisation rules.

There are also issues related to analysis. As a result of protein and DNA degradation during manufacturing or preparation, very little or no DNA can be detected in products such as purified lecithin (for example, soya lecithin), refined vegetable oil (for example, corn oil), starch derivatives (for example, maltodextrin, glucose syrup, corn starch), hydrolysed plant protein (for example, soya sauce powder) and heat-treated or processed finished products (for example, canned products).

The critical issue is ensuring the safety of these products to human health and the environment. However, as Dr Ho highlighted, labelling does not equate to safety.

The story of monarch butterflies and GM maize has been proven to be unlikely. A series of papers in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Science in 2001, including two by Dr John Losey, have shown that it is very unlikely that monarch butterfly larvae could have been poisoned by maize pollen that had been genetically engineered to contain a natural insecticide. Dr John Losey was one of the key authors from Cornell University who had first published the paper in the journal, Nature, that showed the impact of GM maize pollen on monarch butterflies.
So far, there has been no conclusive evidence that any of the GM foods in the market are unsafe. The Genetic Modification Advisory Committee (GMAC) has studied and evaluated reports on the safety tests and risk assessments of GM foods available in the market here, for example, soya bean, corn and canola oil, and agree that they are safe for consumption.

These safety tests and risk assessments are based on well established and accepted scientific evidence, which include but are not restricted to, tests on dietary exposures, toxicity and allergenicity. GMAC will continue to study and evaluate the safety tests and risk assessments of all foods containing GM organisms (GMOs) before they are released into Singapore.
As for the issue of labelling, it is still being examined (see other letter).

GMAC's primary objective is to ensure public and environmental safety, while allowing for the commercial use of GMO and GMO-derived products by companies and research institutions, in compliance with international standards.

GMAC released, in August 1999, the Singapore Guidelines for the Release of Genetically Modified Organisms. They can be found at http://www.gmac.gov.sg/

AIRANI RAMLI (MS)Secretariat,
Genetic Modification Advisory Committee (GMAC)
for Chairman, GMAC

Straits Times Forum Letter - 5th June 2006
GM labelling regime must be practical

I THANK Dr Ooi Can Seng for his comments in his letter, 'GM foods should be labelled clearly' (ST, May 25).

We would like to point out that the lack of international consensus refers to labelling of GM foods and not safety of GM foods, as mentioned in the first paragraph of his letter.
That aside, Dr Ooi raised an issue which Singapore, like other countries in the world, continues to grapple with. Like many other countries in the world, we believe any labelling regime to be implemented must be practical, scientifically derived and effectively implementable.
The issue of labelling raises a host of issues. Dr Ooi has indicated one of them: detection.
The problem of detecting DNA in processed foods is a very real one.

Proteins and DNA degradation occurs during manufacturing and preparation processes. It has been shown, repeatedly, that with current technology, little or no DNA can be detected in products which have undergone significant processing, such as purified lecithin (for example, soya lecithin), refined vegetable oil (for example, corn oil), starch derivatives (for example, maltodextrin, glucose syrup and corn starch), hydrolysed plant protein (for example, soya sauce powder) and heat-treated or processed finished products (for example, canned products).
Commercially available GM crops have been put through rigorous evaluation to establish their safety for consumption.

These safety tests and risk assessments are based on well-established and accepted scientific evidence, which include but are not restricted to tests on dietary exposures, toxicity and allergenicity.

So far, there has been no conclusive scientific evidence that GM foods now in the market are unsafe.

Singapore, as a net importing country, needs to stay alert to worldwide trends and developments.

While the labelling debate continues internationally, we need to ensure that GM foods commercially available are safe for consumption.

The Genetic Modification Advisory Committee will continue to evaluate safety tests and risk assessments of all foods containing GM organisms before they are released into Singapore.
For more information and related news, visit our website at http://www.gmac.gov.sg/

Airani Ramli (MS)Secretariat,
Genetic Modification Advisory Committee
for Chairman, GMAC