London (29.6.09) – We have know for years that gene technology is being used in attempt to remove the offending allergen(s) from peanuts and so render harmless and available a food presenting immense danger to individuals acutely sensitive to peanut allergy (1). Other reports have spoken about removing allergens from soya and sea foods.

In 2003, in order to create a less allergenic soya bean, a team of scientists removed a protein that accounts for about 65 per cent of its allergenicity.
Dr Elliot Herman, a molecular biologist at the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the leader of the soya bean project, said: 'As far as we can tell, we have removed the allergen and we've made no other changes whatsoever.' It did not take long, of course, for anti-GM opponents to claim that the anti-allergenic soybeans might be a hazard to human health!

Now we learn of rice in Japan being modified genetically in order actually to protect against a common allergy in that country resulting from the pollen of Japanese cedar (2), a growing public health problem in Japan that affects about 20 percent of the population.

The study was based on the repeated oral administration of transgenic rice containing a hybrid peptide of major human T-cell epitopes from Japanese cedar pollen allergens, carried out over 26 weeks in cynomolgus macaques. Three groups of animals, each comprising three males and three females, received a high dose or the transgenic rice, a low dose of that rice or a high does of the parental (i.e. “non-GM”) rice.

No adverse effects on general behaviour or body weight of the animals were observed. Blood analyses showed that, with few exceptions, there were no significant differences in haematological or biochemical values between them. Additionally, neither pathological symptoms nor histopathological abnormalities were observed.

The authors concluded that the oral administration of transgenic rice containing T-cell epitopes from Japanese cedar pollen allergens has no adverse effects and presumably might be useful in desensitising sufferers from pollen allergy. There is clearly a long way to go before an effective treatment is available but the study is nevertheless an interesting example of the potential versatility of transgenic technology.

How long before this venture is also accused of being injurious to health?

Sources:

1. James Chapman (17.02.03). GM peanuts could end danger to children. Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-162222/GM-peanuts-end-danger-children.html)

2. Genetically modified rice fights allergies. Live Science (27.6.09) (http://www.livescience.com/health/090627-gm-rice.html)

3. Eiji Domon, Hidenori Takagi, Sakiko Hirose, Koichi Sugita, Saori Kasahara, Hiroyasu Ebinuma and Fumio Takaiwa (2009). 26-week oral safety study in macaques for transgenic rice containing major human T-Cell epitope peptides from Japanese cedar pollen allergens. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 57(12), 5633–5638 (http://pubs.acs.org.ezp.stu.qmul.ac.uk/doi/abs/10.1021/jf900371u)

<<<back