Official Says Biotech Researchers Should Support Own Product VERNON ACHENBACH JR. Lancaster Farming Staff BALA CYNWYD, (Montgom ery Co.) Within the next two years, or less, fanners in Nonh America and the United Kingdom may be using a product of biotech nology to increase milk production in dairy cattle. According to Judy Downer, manager of North American Ani mal Development for American Cyanamid Co., regulatory agency approval for the use of bovine somatotropin (BST) as an inject able protein hormone supplement to increase cow milk production may very well occur not only in the United States, but also the United Kingdom. A speaker at the third annual symposium of the Pennsylvania Biotechnology Association (PBA), held recently near Phi ladelphia at the Adam’s Mark Convention Center, Downer told a large group of peer biotechnology researchers that the European Eco nomic Community (EEC) mora torium on the use of supplemental injections of BST is due to expire December. She said that could very well put the United Kingdom in a position to quickly approve commercial use of the product according to Downer, the UK Veterinary Medi cine Review Board has already approved the animal and human safety of BST. According to the researcher, if the U.S. and UK approve the use of BST, then Canada would not be far behind. In the meantime, the product has already been approved in a number of countries around the world, including Mexico and South Africa. (The effect of BST approval on the pending North American Free Trade Agreement a free market agreement between Canada, Mex ico and the United States and the shipment of dairy products, has not be determined.) The fact that Downer was addressing BST in a public forum is a rarity. All representatives of companies with pending FDA reviews of BST products are not legally allowed to speak about BST to any public group, except fellow researchers. Downer was one of three speak ers during the two-day symposium who were to discuss their com pany’s experiences in attempting to introduce biotechnology pro ducts into the agricultural and food products markets. Also speaking was Karen Cock ley, PhD., RD, manager of the nutritional product development at Wyclh-Ayerst International Inc., who spoke about a genetically altered tomato which received FDA and USDA approval; and Richard Gill, PhD, vice president of British Technology Group, USA. For the past year, the FDA has banned all representatives of all companies with pending reviews of BST products from talking to the general public about those pro ducts and even BST in general. Originally, while not allowed to promote the product, representa tives of the companies involved with BST were permitted to pre sent BST-research supported facts to layman groups in an educational setting. However, the FDA later ordered the companies to refrain from dis cussing the subject at all, unless it was with other researchers. That FDA decision followed com plaints from anti-biotechnology groups which have been fighting the introduction of any product resulting from the direct manipula tion of genetic materials. During her presentation. Dow ner urged researchers to combat efforts from biotech-opposition groups, especially those founded and headed by Jeremy Rilkin, out of Washington D.C. Rifkin’s groups have been call ing for people to intimidate groc ers, food processors and producers in an effort to decrease the salabili ty of a biotechnological product by asking them if they sell “BGH-free milk or meat.” BST is also called bovine growth hormone (BGH), especial ly by the relatively small, but voc al, anti-biotechnology group. While Rifkin’s literature does mention milk or meat derived from cows treated with BST, it does so in small print and in the middle of a paragraph. On the other hand, the phrase, “BGH-free milk or meat” is in relatively large and heavy type, and is easy to see. What disturbs a number of researchers is the misrepresenta tion of biotechnology by Rilkin. For example, there is no such thing as “BGH-free milk or meat” Also, Rilkin has presented the gene transfer technologies in terms nor mally reserved for science fiction horror stories. In an article co-written by Rifk in and his associate, professional fund-raiser Ted Howard, director of Rifkin’s Pure Food Campaign, they refer to genetically altered food crops as “frankenfoods.” Specifically, Rifkinhas targeted such plants as the Calgene Inc. Flavr Savr tomato a breed of tomato that has had a gene attatchcd in order to give it the ability to ripen on the vine for increased flavor and also have long-shelf life —as those the public should fear. To combat such tactics. Downer called on researchers to take subtle, but determined steps to promote their products in the market place. According to Downer, those people, especially researchers who believe in the safety of food pro ducts created through biotechnolo gy, should stand up for it. “The next time you go into a supermarket, ask the manager, ‘Where are those Flavr-Savr toma toes I keep hearing about? I want to buy some,’” said Downer. “And say, ‘Where is that milk that is made from cows treated with BST? I want to buy some of it, so I can help keep dairy farmers in business.” she said. American Cyanamid and Mon santo are among four biotech com panies in the United States who have developed methods for alter ing the genetic coding of bacteria to manufacture enough BST so that it can be injected and used as a tool in dairy farming. A cow’s physiology is such that BST plays a significant role in directing nutrients to the milk producing tissue in the mammary system, thereby encouraging addi tional milk production. BST is a protein hormone, which, like all protein chains, is broken down by the digestive sys tem, therefore, it can not, of and by itself, create any kind of reaction when ingested. It also cannot cause a reaction in humans, even when injected, because the human protein hor mone receptors cannot react to BST. They arc specific for the molecular structure of the human hormone. In other words, protein hor mones, such as BST, act as “keys” to tum-on or tum-off certain body functions, and the cow key doesn’t fit the human lock. While the federal Food and Drug Administration had been expected to approve BST by the end of 1992, the Government Accounting Office, an agency of the Democrat-ruled House, posed last minute questions about human health risks from BST. The first question was based on the possibility that because there was a slight statistical increase in mastitis discovered during research that there may be a result ing increase in farmers using anti biotics to treat mastitis, and then the consumer would be at an increased risk of developing a resistance to penicillin, or have an allergic reaction. All of this assumption was made without the knowledge and under standing of the tight testing and heavy punishment system in place in the dairy industry and without the knowledge that dairy farmers have been advised that using anti biotics to treat mastitis symptoms can be a waste of money, because the symptoms resulting from a mastitis infections are noticed after the disease has rim its course and penicillin does nothing for symptoms. The recommended treatment for mastitis is frequent milking and maintaining a clean, dry environ ment for cows. A hearing resulted in the the FDA’s Veterinary Advisory Com mittee dismissing the concern as insignificant The other delay was caused by a call by Rifkin and some others to require labeling of milk produced through the use of supplemental BST. However, since the animal produced BST which is in all milk and meat, and the bacteria produced BST is identical in func tion and no test is conceived that could detect a difference, it is like- Research Shows Milk Has Proteins (Continued from Page A 26) Genetically unique milk protein members can be accumulated and increased in frequency for new offspring generations through dairy cow-breeding programs that select for specific genetic milk protein traits. Among the different genetic members, kappa-casein B already is mentioned more than others as having potential economic benefit for new breeding programs. Early indications are that some of these genetic members provide oppor tunities in breeding cows with more fitness, greater disease resis tance, and better breeding effi ciency and longevity. The very latest discovery is that not all Holstein populations in the world have the same or even simi lar genetic inventories of possible genetic members. Holsteins in Holland, West- Germany, East-Germany and the United States (and maybe else where) differ in the presence or absence of a new casein type alpha-s-l F, so far found only in pure Old World Holsteins, with out any mixing-in of U.S. Holstein breeding. This means an opportunity in processing and digestion charac teristics that has yet to be deter mined. ly the FDA will not support the request. Also, the FDA had long ago approved the human safety of milk produced by cows treated with additional BST. In fact, milk and meat derived from BST-treated cows has been in the general milk supply for years. The safety of ingesting BST has also been questioned because of a study in which rats were fed high doses of BST. Downer said that the study done with rats does not indicate any direct negative effects from BST, per se. Rather, she said the test results, which showed problems with the rats on the higb-BST diet, occured because the rats were fed such high amounts of BST, that the protein portion of the rats’ diet was insufficient. In other words, the test, by design, created an unhealthy situa tion for the rats the amino acids in the BST protein are not suffi cient for the complete dietary needs of rats. According to Downer, what the rat-tests did prove was that rats don’t do well on a protein insufficient diet, just as any other organism deprived of sufficient nutrition would react negadvely. Her call for associates to take a marketplace stance for biotechnol ogy derived food additives and products was questioned after her talk. Specifically, one person ques tioned the effect such confronta tion would have on a grocer who doesn’t know or can’t get such products. Downer said that while the groc er may be confused about the request for biotech-derived foods, it is an effort to counter the call by Rifkin to have people question grocers and food retailers and ask the businessmen to ban such products. Rifkin has also made claims that there is a risk that genetic coding attatched to plants to increase pest resistance and evnironmental Certainly it underscores the im portance of conserving genetic re sources in animal populations, es pecially in minor populations, such as Old World Holsteins, or the endangered minor cattle breeds in Europe and around the world. The new genetic research into what may seem a confusing multi tude of milk protein types and categories is really an opportunity just beginning to open up. The potential for economic benefits for consumers, processors and dairy farmers, is great, espe cially when the medical profes sion sees fit to include these gene tic differences in their health re search. It may even help correct the misconceptions which Dr. Spock promoted not too long ago about milk for babies. It should also serve to alleviate allergies people may have to cow’s milk. The technical literature staled years ago that one big difference between cow’s and goat’s mjlk is the absence in goat’s milk of a ma jor casein genetic member present in cow’s milk, alpha-s-l. We now know from French and Italian research that this is not true for all goats. Some goats have this genetic member; others have less or none. Between them is a vast difference in cheese-making prop- tolerance may “drift” into weeds, and thus increase the use of pesti cides and from that, increase the risk of people eating foods with pesticide residues. However, the possibility of .cross-specie genetic transfer occuring obstensibly through cross-specie pollination —is theoretically nil. Some experts reason that if such an occurance were possible, such things would have occured already such as dandelions picking up genetic material from blue grass or trees, or people hav ing their genes altered to reflect the genetic coding from the plants and animals they eat. But the scientific community is reticent to say that anything is impossible. Scientists hold that just because something has never been observed, or that no evidence exists for such a thing being possi ble outside of the laboratory, it should not be said to be impossible. However, the scietific commun ity does hold the likelihood to be extremely improbable. Though Rifkin’s concerns are considered extreme by most scien tists, the scientific community has hestitated to publicly lambast Rifldn on the acknowledgement that know one can ever know what is possible. Paul Grun, Penn State Universi ty professor emeritus, retired in 1989 after spending years working on the evolution, of the potato plant. Though he used traditional breeding techniques to obtain genetic variety instead of the , “transgenic” techniques used to develop the Flavr Savr tomato or the mutogenic techniques, referred to by one researcher as “enhanced” selective breeding techniques. With mutogenic techniques, known agents of chromosomal mutation are used to alter the DNA of plants, which are then grown and selected. He said that almost all of our current food crops have been created through that process. erlies, curd firmness, curd coagu lation time and heat stability. So, once again, new opportuni ties from genetic selection is de pendent upon preserving breeds, particularly those with small populations. House Declares June Is Dairy Month HARRISBURG (Dauphin Co.) June 1993 has been designated Dairy Month in Pennsylvania un der a House Resolution approved Tuesday. According to resolution co sponsor state Rep. Jeffrey Coy, “The dairy industry is the leading agriculture industry in Pennsylva nia with annual revenues totalling SI.S billion. Our state exports $26 million worth of dairy products annually.” Coy said that the common wealth ranks fourth nationally in milk production. Milk is also the official beverage of Pennsylvania. “Pennsylvania farmers produce 1 billion gallons of milk annually, which accounts for nearly 7 per cent of the total milk production in the United States,” Coy said.
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers