In October 2002, LA Weekly published a story about "pharming" gone awry: corn that had been genetically modified to incorporate a vaccine for pigs was found growing in a field of soybean being grown for human consumption. The corn, which should have been destroyed after harvesting, apparently had germinated (="volunteer") along with the next season's crop, soybean.  The USDA ordered the soybean crop to be confiscated and then destroyed, so as to prevent contamination of the food supply in the market.

This incident led to a great deal of discussion and controversy regarding the safety of "pharming" and the adequacy of regulation governing it.  The USDA then made some changes in regulations.

In December 2005, an audit report (pdf) on the APHIS, the USDA regulatory body, found that APHIS efforts to regulate GM crops were inadequate.  In particular, they pointed out issues with high-risk crops, such as those that produce pharmaceutical and industrial compounds.

In our class discussion, we will examine the molecular, organismal, ecological and societal issues surrounding these events in order to develop an informed understanding of the fiasco and subsequent events surrounding the development of Plant-Made-Pharmaceuticals (PMPs).

A major goal is to encourage you to think about issues so as to identify the level at which the "problem" (if any) lies.  Is it at the organismal level? Then the solution has to be sought at that level, and not the molecular one.  Does the problem involve regulatory issues (societal)? Then the solution should be sought at that level, and not in biology.

People make unjustified extrapolations all the time without thinking twice about it. In this exercise, you want to think at least two, if not more, times before extrapolating between levels of organization. 

This means that you should be familiar with key details at different levels.

Know about the "pharmed" corn
Read this link to a brief description of the PMP.

The Fiasco and after
Read these links to newspaper articles on the continuing saga of "pharmacrops," starting with the most recent reports and ending with the article that first broke the story.  Read enough to understand what happened in 2002.
To have some idea of developments since then, read this article regarding the audit report on the USDA-APHIS.

And for legal actions across the US: Hawaii, Oregon.

What are "pharmacrops"= Plant made pharmaceuticals (PMP)?

• Giddings, G. et al.  2000. Transgenic plants as factories for biopharmaceuticals. Nature Biotech. 18: 1151-55 [find this on blackboard under 'course documents']
• Ellstrand, N. 2001. When transgenes wander, should we worry? Plant Physiol. 145: 1544-5 [find this on blackboard under 'course documents']
• http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6971
  
• Katsnelson, A. 2004. Fear of Pharming. Scientific American Sept 20, 2004 
  

FAQ on Genetically Engineered Organisms in Agriculture (Center for Science in the Public Interest)
Bio-pharming: (Colorado State University)
Sensible pharmaceutical production (Union of Concerned Scientists)
Biopharm: Issues and News Analysis (Dr Foley, Univ Wisc., 2002)
GM-Bipharm watch (Earthjustice)

What is genetic engineering?
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) have brief accounts of biotechnology, genetic engineering, and other such exciting matters; for details on techniques, look at these UCS and UCDavis sites.  

1. Read the accounts given above

2. Be able to answer these questions about the particular incidents covered:

3. Identify each of these steps/events to the appropriate level of organization:

Identify to the molecular, biochemical, cellular, organismal, ecological or societal level.
(Look here (pdf) for my analysis of a complex and controversial issue, the introduction of Bt cotton in India, and here to check out what's been happening since then)

4. Identify unexplored or problematic issues at any of the steps:

 Write down all of these points.

There will be a discussion on this topic.

You will assigned one of the following roles in one of several groups of five: pharmaceutical representative; university scientist (declare any affiliations you might have with the pharmaceutical company); USDA representative; local government representative; member of the public.

In the morning, you will talk within your group to make sure that you can answer the questions under (2) above. You  should  be prepared to present this understanding to the class.

In the afternoon, you will take on 'your' role within your group and make the strongest arguments possible for 'your' position.  Following these discussions, your group should make a decision about whether or not, and under what conditions, you wish to allow the development, testing and cultivation of PMP's in your county.  You should be able to explain why you came to this decision.

Finally, re-visit the points you listed under 1-4 above. Did you change your mind about any of them?

Link to my web page on related topics