In an interview, Johannes Klose, Scientific Advisor, Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty, talks about the opportunities and the risks that genetically modified organisms entail.
Genetically modified organisms and insurance
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are controversial. How does an insurer handle such an issue?
Johannes Klose: True, genetics and food is making headlines, but we shouldn't forget that it is just one part of genetic engineering. So many other aspects of daily life are influenced as well: the production of new medicines, genetic testing, gene therapy, stem cell research, genetically manufactured enzymes.
Ten years ago, many of these technologies were fiercely debated by the insurance industry. Today, many of them have become normal. We have learned a lot about risks and impacts. Regulation has evolved as well. GMOs for agricultural use, however, still create a lot of dissent and debate, especially in Europe.
Johannes Klose: "We have learned a lot about risks and impacts"
What is so controversial about GMOs?
It depends where you are looking. In the US for example, many people don't seem to care too much about GMO's. This is to a large extent due to the regulatory concept of 'substantial equivalence' which means that agricultural GMO's are generally recognized as safe and are therefore not subject to labeling in the US.
People in the US do usually not know what they buy and this may be a reason why they do not care that much. If they are asked about their preferences, GMO-free food versus food containing GMO, the majority says they do not want genetically modified food. But that answer can depend on how the question is asked. In general, the attitude in the US towards new technologies of all kinds is more positive than in Europe.
In Europe, the majority of consumers and many non-governmental organizations don't want genetically modified crops. And it's obvious why not. You cannot see or feel the difference; you cannot taste it and, if it wasn't labeled, no one would ever realize GMOs are there. This is probably the biggest problem. Consumers cannot easily recognize the benefits of genetically modified products, but they realize that there are potential risks.
What are these risks?
Most people are concerned about contamination. GMOs can intermingle with conventional organisms by transferring some genes to non-modified plants. Basically, genetically modified plants always have an additional piece of DNA. This can produce a new protein that makes the plant resistant to a herbicide. But the protein may also cause toxicities or allergies.
This is something you can test, but the long-term effects on human health and the environment are nearly impossible to test. You would have to monitor this for decades, but you cannot do this because this would put people at risk. It's a catch-22 situation.
This has already led to losses for insurance companies. One example was a type of genetically modified maize that was approved for industrial use only. But a consumer protection group detected traces of the transgenic maize in tortillas sold in a supermarket. The manufacturer then had to recall everything, and this cost a lot of money.
How can you avoid contamination?
It is virtually impossible to achieve a 100 percent separation of GMO and non-GMO crops. It starts with the seeds. Even if they contain very, very small traces of genetically modified DNA, the crop will be affected. Furthermore, bees and pollens do easily cross the 660 feet distance often used to isolate GMO and non-GMO fields.
That is why there is a threshold value in the European Union (EU). If a non-GMO product stays below 0.9 percent of GMO content it doesn't have to be labeled as GMO in the EU. But if you insure for inadvertently crossing this threshold you are creating a moral hazard, an incentive for not trying to be compliant.
In the US, you don't have to label genetically modified food. However, there are initiatives who want to introduce GMO-free labels in the US and in Europe. The value of the labels obviously depends how you define 'GMO-free'.
But from what we know today, GMO's for agricultural use, which have been approved in Europe, most likely do not pose any short-term health risks. A definite answer concerning long-term effects on human and animal health can only be given many years in the future.
What are the possible benefits of GMOs in agriculture?
It depends whom we are looking at. The benefit for companies that supply the seeds is that they can sell a new product and provide innovative solutions for agricultural challenges like drought or diseases. The growers benefit from increased productivity and quality, and maybe less need for herbicides.
But the benefits start to diminish along the food value chain. There is probably no advantage for a retailer or a food processor to handle GMO material versus non-GMO material. At the level of the consumer the benefit gets very difficult to grasp.
How do you see agricultural GMOs developing?
Well, it looks like the development in America and Europe is diverging more than ever. In Europe, there is a widespread ban on the only commercially marketed GM-maize, and there are an ever increasing number of GMO-free regions. Italy has banned the cultivation of all genetically engineered crops and Austria was one of the first European countries to declare itself a GMO-free zone.
America, India, and China are already the main GMO producers of the world. And this will be even more so if the current trends continue. There is still a need to regulate issues such as transboundary movement of living modified organisms, and rules for liability and redress for potential damage caused. Some progress was made within the framework of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and subsequent meetings. But there is still a lot to be done regarding risk assessment, monitoring, and information exchange.
This interview was first published on the Allianz Knowledge Partnersite.
As with all content published on this site, these statements are subject to our Forward Looking Statement disclaimer.
Link to the disclaimer