EnviroPig aka FrankenPork the Monster

Mar 2 23:50 UTC 2006

Scientists have, according to this story, made a genetically engineered pig,
but no one has quite figured out how to test that pig to make sure it's safe
to eat. 

The new "enviropigs" -- those genetically modified porkers who carry an extra
gene that causes them to have less phosphorus in their manure -- will be the
first animals to be tested under Health Canada's guidelines for genetically
modified foods. 

These pigs, being raised at the University of Guelph, hold the promise of
being environmentally friendly. The extra gene causes bodily changes that help
them digest the phosphorus in their feed instead of excreting it, which means
cleaner, more drinkable lakes, rivers and streams. 

But the pigs' arrival also brings science to uncharted waters. Guelph
microbiologist Cecil Forsberg, who helped create the pigs, was cited as saying
that technology is moving "faster than a slim government agency can move,"
and it's not clear, for example, how to test the pork to ensure it's safe.


The story says that Forsberg is working with federal government scientists
to develop a policy to test genetically modified meat and that currently, a
policy exists only for plants, which are biologically less complex. The extra
gene causes production of the enzyme phytase, which lets the pig digest
phosphorus in its feed. Trace amounts of phytase have been found elsewhere
in the pig's body. There's a chance that humans might have allergic reactions
to it, and also to the E.coli bacteria and mouse genes that were used to make
the extra gene. But it's difficult to test for allergic reactions, especially
on a substance that hasn't caused a reaction in humans before. You can't test
on mice or rats because their immune systems are so different from humans.


All these questions are part of what concerns other scientists, who say there
isn't enough testing on genetically modified foods, and we can't be sure
they're safe. 

Hugh Lehman, a retired philosophy professor from the University of Guelph,
was quoted as saying, "To me, it's very risky. Very small chemical differences
can have profound implications. If it's anything people are going to eat,
there should be extensive and rigorous testing," The story says that Lehman
was among a group of high-ranking scientists who publicly warned earlier this
year that our existing food supply could be contaminated by genetically
engineered crops that haven't been tested rigorously enough. 

In a recent interview, Lehman quoted the work of a Scottish scientist who
noticed abnormalities in rats that were fed genetically engineered potatoes.
But Doug Powell, a University of Guelph professor of plant agriculture who
is scientific director of the Centre for Safe Food in Guelph, was quoted as
saying that research "has been largely repudiated" by other academics and that
genetically engineered foods are subjected to much higher safety requirements
and testing than new foods that are developed by traditional breeding
practices. 

Meanwhile, Forsberg said the new enviropigs appear to be physically normal,
and he believes they'll be declared safe to eat within five years. 

response 2 of 14:

Mar 3 04:01 UTC 2006

Soybeans are soaked not so much to remove the phytase as to remove
mucopolysaccharides, which are indigestible by humans but digested by stomach
or intestinal bacteria to cause flatulence.  Cooking destroys things like
phytase - it denatures proteins.  Making tofu uses another method to remove
the mucopolysaccharides - it precipitates out the proteins from the soymilk
to make soy curd, and leaves behind the 'indigestible' whey, which gets fed
to pigs.  They either digest or excrete it or their bacteria digest it. 
Another biproduct is the insoluble proteins, known in Japanese as okara, which
you can cook with rice for added protein.  

All beans have chemicals that specifically interfere with digesting them raw.
You can get sick from eating half-cooked dry lima-beans (I did that once).
The seeds don't want to be eaten.

response 4 of 14:

Mar 3 06:21 UTC 2006

If the pigs digest phosphorous, and do not excrete it, on what form is the
phosphorous retained permanently in the pig? And, if we eat the pigs, won't
we ingest and excrete that extra phosphorous in our manure, so what is gained?
It's not April 1, so that can't explain this item. 

response 6 of 14:

Mar 3 06:33 UTC 2006

Would the pigs begin to glow in the dark?

response 8 of 14:

Mar 3 14:34 UTC 2006

I thought most pigs were now grown in buildings, with impermeable floors, and
the manure that is produced could be used as fertilizer rather than wasted.