Should consumers be concerned about the healthfulness of the non-browning GMO Arctic Apple?

On April 23, a Twitter Party was organized under the hashtag #NoGMapple to stop the approval of the Arctic Apple. The Twitter Party was sponsored by several organic food companies and promoted by several “mommy bloggers”.

The Arctic Apple is currently under review for approval in Canada and the US. It is being made by a small company in British Columbia, Canada, called Okanagan Specialty Fruits, so it has not “suffered from Monsantonization” (a dreaded process in which our food is exposed to satanic rituals in Monsanto’s basement). The technology for the non-browning apples will be patented and owned by the company.

So, why non-browning apples? According to this article from the New York Times, 60 percent of consumers were likely to purchase the fruit (however, a separate survey found that 70 percent of Canadians did not approve of a genetically modified apple). The Arctic Apple’s website highlights the fact that a lot more people and places would use apples if they didn’t looked bruised or brown and that a lot of apples are thrown out.

When I examine my own shopping habits, I think it’s probably true. I never pick up a bruised apple. If you consider that groceries generally display their best produce, it leaves you wondering how many bruised apples were discarded from the farm to the store. A recent piece in NPR highlights that Americans throw away half their food, much of which is still edible. According to Wikipedia, apples are the third most discarded food in the UK, so it may rank high in the US as well. The company is also banking on the fact that the juice/cider from Arctic Apples is clear, so they will not need anti-browning treatment in the juice/cider production process.

Ultimately, this product is being made by a private company, so it is reasonable to assume it’s done all the research that there is a market for this product before investing millions of dollars in making a genetically modified fruit. After all, I thought the iPad was a stupid idea and now I own one….

Why apples brown

Before describing how the Arctic Apple has been genetically modified, we have to understand why apples turn brown (additional reference is here). Apples begin browning when they are injured: cells break down and release two molecules that were previously in different compartments. The joining of these two compounds in the presence of oxygen leads to the formation of a pigmented polymer. The two compounds that are joined are a) polyphenol oxidases (PPO), which are a class of enzymes, and b) phenols. So when you cut, bite or bruise an apple, you damage cells and bring these compounds into contact with one another. Some types of apples brown more quickly than others because they have more PPO. This is the same process that makes bananas brown as well.

The Arctic Apple doesn’t have as much of the PPO enzymes, because the transgene that has been added triggers a process called RNA interference (for a great video explanation, see this animation here). RNA interference is a naturally occurring defense mechanism against viruses that basically hacks up specific RNA. But scientists have been harnessing the same methodology for decades to decrease the amount of RNA for a gene. If you manage to get rid of the RNA, then the protein doesn’t get made. In the Arctic Apple, they added a DNA sequence that triggers RNA interference for all the different PPO enzymes. The RNA gets chopped up, the PPO enzyme never gets made, so the apples never brown. Apparently, the Arctic Apple manages to turn off the PPO enzyme by ~90 percent. It’s important to note that the sequence that has been added that triggers that RNA interference process is from the apple itself. It isn’t from a different species.

A few additional segments of DNA are in the Arctic Apple (outlined here). The most controversial of these is a gene conferring antibiotic resistance (to kanamyacin). When working with transgenes, these antibiotic resistant markers are needed in the early stages in the lab so that you can figure out which cells picked up the transgene and which ones didn’t.

Critics’ complaints

Critics have multiple complaints about the Arctic Apple. Here’s a list of the arguments I’ve found:

• Consumers are worried about antibiotic resistance. Understandable. However, the antibiotic resistance gene is only turned on in the leaves and isn’t present in the fruit. In fact, just for kicks, I tried to search for recipes that used apple leaves. All of them had apple leaves made out of delicious pastry, so I don’t think that anyone will be impacted by this. The European Food Safety Authority has thoroughly investigated the topic of antibiotic resistance through GMOs, particularly their transfer to bacteria. Here’s the conclusion: “the current state of knowledge indicates that adverse effects on human health and the environment resulting from the transfer of these two antibiotic resistance genes from GM plants to bacteria, associated with use of GM plants, are unlikely.”

• This will be another blow to the struggling EU-US apple relations. Apple imports were recently banned in the EU, but this is due to “different regulatory standards and requirements for pesticides and food additives“. The Arctic Apple tree does not need any different type of pesticide or herbicide, so this argument doesn’t really apply (unless someone is going to suggest that a GMO is a “food additive”). Additionally, and most importantly, the Arctic Apple is not seeking regulatory approval for Europe.

• A new, almost entirely untested genetic modification technology, called RNA interference, or double strand RNA (dsRNA), is responsible for this new food miracle. RNA-interference is definitely not an untested genetic modification technology. As I previously mentioned, scientists have been using it in labs for decades, and much work has been done in trying to make gene therapy and drugs using the technology. However, the Arctic Apple is the first commercial genetically modified food that I know of that will use this technology, but I’m sure that it will be the first of many (and several are in the works).

• Scientists warn that this genetic manipulation poses health risks, as the manipulated RNA gets into our digestive systems and bloodstreams. There is no evidence that this occurs. A paper published in 2011 suggested that RNA from plants might regulate mammalian genes, but the findings of this paper have never been reproduced. Follow up studies suggest that the observations from the paper in 2011 may have been due to contamination. But for the sake of argument, I imagined the scenario where the ingestion of the manipulated RNA got into our system and actually did something. I think that the apocalypse that the article is implying is the possibility that ingesting RNA from the Arctic Apple might trigger the RNAi pathway within our bodies. However, I could not find any reference to the existence of the PPO enzyme in mammals nor does the DNA sequence from the PPO enzyme in the apple have a comparable sequence in mammals. If all we had to do was to eat the DNA/RNA of a gene to trigger RNA interference in our bodies, wouldn’t we be chugging the DNA/RNA for genes to make us skinny, lower cholesterol, regulate blood sugar, etc? Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way.

• By “hiding” the browning of the apple, consumers will not know how old the apple really is. The company argues that by diminishing the browning, it will make mold and bacteria even more visible. Keep in mind that a perfectly fresh apple can be bruised/browned, so browning is not a measurement of age.

• Customers do not want this apple. Some customers may not want this apple, but this customer does! I reached out to the Arctic Apple team to find out about their labelling policy. They stated that their apples will have an “Arctic Apple” sticker. Their website also states that food that have >5% Arctic Apple will be labelled with the Arctic logo.

Arctic apple will contaminate our apple supply with it’s GM pollen. I generally go peach picking each year, but last year, I went apple picking at a fantastic farm in Belleville, Ontario with my sister and our families. They had several different varieties growing side-by-side, and we were instructed on which varieties were ripe for that particular week, so different types of apples co-exist in the same orchard and they don’t all “convert” to the same variety. This is true for many different fruit trees. Although apple pollination is generally carried out by bees and not by wind, growers of Arctic Apples will be adhering to a Stewardship Agreement which includes a requirement for a buffer zone between the Arctic Apple orchard and surrounding orchards.

The company’s website also extols the health benefits of the Arctic Apple. They claim that by suppressing the amount of PPO in the apple, you actually have more anti-oxidants available to you. However, I believe that more research is needed to determine the actual health benefits.

Most of us live in nations with free markets. As such, this product has the right to exist and, once it clears regulatory hurdles, to be sold. The usual arguments that many have against GMOs do not apply in this case: it isn’t sold by Big Ag, it will be labelled as an Arctic Apple, it doesn’t need any special herbicides/pesticides (in fact, you could use organic farming practices), and the gene is from the apple itself. Those who don’t like it, don’t have to buy it. There are plenty of other options on the shelf. I, for one, look forward to a whole market of non-browning “Arctic” fruit (I’m keeping my fingers crossed for a non-browning avocado).

Can’t wait to bake my first apple crisp with an Arctic Apple!

Layla Katiraee, contributor to the Genetic Literacy Project, holds a PhD in Molecular Genetics from the University of Toronto and is a Senior Scientist in Product Development at a biotech company in California. All opinions and views expressed are her own.