Genetiği Değiştirilmiş Tarım Ürünlerinin Küresel Düzeyde Olası Etkileri

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 33 Sayı: 1, 179 - 196, 01.06.2019

Seda Yılmaz Çebi Prof. Dr. Emine Olhan

Öz

Küresel düzeyde
ekimi 20 yılı aşkın süredir devam eden genetiği değiştirilmiş (GD) tarım
ürünlerinin ekim alanı 2017 yılında 189,8 milyon hektara kadar ulaşmıştır.
Ticari amaçlı yetiştirilen GD tarım ürünlerinin çoğu herbisit
dirençli, böcek dirençli ya da her iki özelliği birlikte taşımaktadır. Bu ürünlerin açlık ve yetersiz beslenme sorununa
çözüm olduğu, verim ve üretim artışı yoluyla çiftlik gelirlerini arttırdığı ve
pestisit kullanımını azaltması dolayısıyla çevre üzerinde olumlu etkisi olduğu
iddialarının yanında; sağlık, çevre ve biyoçeşitlilik üzerinde olumsuz
etkilerinin olduğu ileri sürülmektedir. Bu çalışmada güncel veriler ışığında GD
tarım ürünlerinin dünyadaki mevcut durumu ve bu ürünlerin ekiminin ve kullanımının
sağlık, beslenme, sosyoekonomi, kültürel, etik ve dini değerler ile çevre ve
biyoçeşitlilik üzerindeki olası olumlu ve olumsuz etkilerinin değerlendirilmesi
ve yorumlanması amaçlanmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

GDO, GD tarım ürünleri, sağlık, sosyoekonomik, çevre, biyoçeşitlilik

Kaynakça

• Almeida, V. E. S. D., Friedrich, K., Tygel, A. F., Melgarejo, L., & Carneiro, F. F. 2017. Use of genetically modified crops and pesticides in Brazil: growing hazards. Ciencia & saude coletiva, 22, 3333-3339.
• Anonim 2010. Biyogüvenlik Kanunu. Kanun No:5977.
• Anonymous 2010. The politics of poverty: elites, citizens and states. Findings from ten years of DFID-funded research on governanceand fragile states 2001–2010. Department for International Development, London, UK. https://www.oecd.org/derec/unitedkingdom/48688822.pdf (16.09.2018).
• Anonymous 2012. https://bch.cbd.int/protocol/background/ (14.10. 2018).
• Anonymous 2015. Directive (EU) 2015/412 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2015 amending Directive 2001/18/EC as regards the possibility for the Member States to restrict or prohibit the cultivation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in their territory Text with EEA relevance.
• Anonymous 2016. Genetically engineered crops: experiences and prospects. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. National Academies Press.
• Anonymous 2017. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops in 2017: Biotech Crop Adoption Surges as Economic Benefits Accumulate in 22 Years. ISAAA Brief No. 53. ISAAA: Ithaca, NY.
• Anonymous. 2018a. European Commission: GMO Legislation http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/gmo/legislation_en (15.10.2018).
• Anonymous 2018b. U.S. Food And Drug Administration GR2E Response Letter RE: Biotechnology Notification File No. BNF 000158 https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/IngredientsPackagingLabeling/GEPlants/Submissions/ucm608797.pdf (16.09.2018).
• Anonymous 2018c. U.S. Food And Drug Administration Biotechnology Notification File No. 000158 Note to the File Date: May 8, 2018. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/IngredientsPackagingLabeling/GEPlants/Submissions/ucm607450.pdf (16.09.2018)
• Atsan, T. ve Kaya, T.E., 2008. Genetiği değiştirilmiş organizmaların (GDO) tarım ve insan sağlığı üzerine etkileri. Uludağ Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(2), pp.1-6.
• Benbrook, C. M. 2012. Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use in the US--the first sixteen years. Environmental Sciences Europe, 24(1), 24.
• Bøhn, T., Cuhra, M., Traavik, T., Sanden, M., Fagan, J., and Primicerio, R. 2014. Compositional differences in soybeans on the market: glyphosate accumulates in Roundup Ready GM soybeans. Food chemistry, 153, 207-215.
• Brookes, G. and P. Barfoot. 2017. GM Crops: Global Socio-economic and Environmental Impacts 1996-2015. PG Economics Ltd, UK. pp 1-201.
• Burkhardt, J. 2008. The Ethics of Agri-Food Biotechnology: How Can an Agricultural Technology be so Important?. In What Can Nanotechnology Learn From Biotechnology? (pp. 55-79).
• Carpenter, J. E. 2011. Impact of GM crops on biodiversity. GM crops, 2(1), 7-23.
• Daño, E. C. 2007. Potential socio-economic, cultural and ethical impacts of GMOs: Prospects for socio-economic impact assessment. Third World Network.
• De Steur, H., Blancquaert, D., Lambert, W., Van Der Straeten, D. and Gellynck, X. 2014. Conceptual framework for ex-ante evaluation at the micro/macro level of GM crops with health benefits. Trends in food science & technology, 39(2), 116-134.
• De Vendômois, J. S., Roullier, F., Cellier, D.,Séralini, G. E. 2009. A comparison of the effects of three GM corn varieties on mammalian health. International Journal of Biological Sciences, 5(7), 706.
• Domingo, J. L., and Bordonaba, J. G. 2011. A literature review on the safety assessment of genetically modified plants. Environment International, 37(4), 734-742.
• Dona, A. and Arvanitoyannis, I. S. 2009. Health risks of genetically modified foods. Critical reviews in food science and nutrition, 49(2), 164-175.
• Fabiansson, C. and Fabiansson, S. 2016. Food and the Risk Society: The Power of Risk Perception. Routledge.
• Finger, R., El Benni, N., Kaphengst, T., Evans, C., Herbert, S., Lehmann, B., ... & Stupak, N. (2011). A meta analysis on farm-level costs and benefits of GM crops. Sustainability, 3(5), 743-762.
• Gómez-Barbero, M. and Rodruigez-Cerezo, E. 2007. GM crops in EU agriculture. A case study for the BIO4EU project. European Commission, DG JRC. Institute for Prospective Technology Studies. http://bio4eu. jrc. ec. europa. eu/documents/FINALGMcropsintheEU BIO4EU. pdf, Sevilla.
• Goodman, R. E. and Tetteh, A. O. 2011. Suggested improvements for the allergenicity assessment of genetically modified plants used in foods. Current allergy and asthma reports, 11(4), 317-324.
• Gurian-Sherman, D. 2009. Failure to yield: Evaluating the performance of genetically engineered crops. Union of Concerned Scientists.
• Gürpınar, D. 2013. Biyogüvenlik Kanunu Çerçevesinde Hukuki Sorumluluk. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Cilt: 15, Özel S., 2013, s.1067-1109.
• Khattak, J. Z. K., Mir, A., Anwar, Z., Abbas, G., Khattak, H. Z. K., & Ismatullah, H. 2011. Concept of halal food and biotechnology. Advance Journal of Food Science and Technology, 3(5), 385-389.
• Kleter, G. A. and Peijnenburg, A. A. 2004. Prediction of the potential allergenicity of novel proteins. In Allergy Matters: new approaches to allergy prevention and management: the international conference on allergy prevention, Wageningen, The Netherlands 4-6 February 2004 (pp. 85-93).
• Klümper, W. and Qaim, M., 2014. A meta-analysis of the impacts of genetically modified crops. PloS one, 9(11), p.e111629.
• Li, L., Pegg, R.B., Eitenmiller, R.R., Chun, J.Y. and Kerrihard, A.L., 2017. Selected nutrient analyses of fresh, fresh-stored, and frozen fruits and vegetables. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 59, pp.8-17.
• Ludlow, K., Smyth, S. J. and Falck-Zepeda, J. (Eds.). 2013. Socio-economic considerations in biotechnology regulation(Vol. 37). Springer Science & Business Media.
• Magaña-Gómez, J. A. and Calderón de la Barca, A. M. 2009. Risk assessment of genetically modified crops for nutrition and health. Nutrition Reviews, 67(1), 1-16.
• McIntyre B. D. 2009. Agriculture at a Crossroads. International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), Global Report. Island Press,Washington D.C.
• Midtvedt, T. 2014. Antibiotic resistance and genetically modified plants. Microbial ecology in health and disease, 25.
• Naegeli, H., Birch, A.N., Casacuberta, J., De Schrijver, A., Gralak, M.A., Guerche, P., Jones, H., Manachini, B., Messéan, A. and Nielsen, E.E., 2017. Guidance on allergenicity assessment of genetically modified plants. EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). EFSA Journal, 15(6), p.e04862.
• Nordlee, J. A., Taylor, S. L., Townsend, J. A., Thomas, L. A. and Bush, R. K. 1996. Identification of a Brazil-nut allergen in transgenic soybeans. New England Journal of Medicine, 334(11), 688-692.
• Olhan, E. 2010. Modern biyoteknolojinin tarımda kullanımının politik ve ekonomik yönden değerlendirilmesi. Genetiği değiştirilmiş organizmalar, Ankara Tabip Odası, Ankara.
• Schütte, G., Eckerstorfer, M., Rastelli, V., Reichenbecher, W., Restrepo-Vassalli, S., Ruohonen-Lehto, M., Saucy, A.G.W. and Mertens, M., 2017. Herbicide resistance and biodiversity: agronomic and environmental aspects of genetically modified herbicide-resistant plants. Environmental Sciences Europe, 29(1), p.5.
• Tang, G., Qin, J., Dolnikowski, G.G., Russell, R.M. and Grusak, M.A., 2009. Golden Rice is an effective source of vitamin A–. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 89(6), pp.1776-1783.
• Tsatsakis, A.M., Nawaz, M.A., Kouretas, D., Balias, G., Savolainen, K., Tutelyan, V.A., Golokhvast, K.S., Lee, J.D., Yang, S.H. and Chung, G., 2017. Environmental impacts of genetically modified plants: a review. Environmental research, 156, pp.818-833.
• Wu, Y., Xu, Y., Du, Y., Zhao, X., Hu, R., Fan, X., Ren, F., Yao, Q., Peng, R., Tang, X. and Zhao, K., 2017. Dietary safety assessment of genetically modified rice EH rich in β-carotene. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 88, pp.66-71.
• Yuan, D., Bassie, L., Sabalza, M., Miralpeix, B., Dashevskaya, S., Farre, G., Rivera, S.M., Banakar, R., Bai, C., Sanahuja, G. and Arjó, G., 2011. The potential impact of plant biotechnology on the Millennium Development Goals. Plant cell reports, 30(3), pp.249-265.
• Zhang, C., Wohlhueter, R .and Zhang, H. 2016. Genetically modified foods: A critical review of their promise and problems. Food Science and Human Wellness, 5(3), 116-123.