Got Hypoallergenic Milk? No
No, scientists have not created hypoallergenic milk, no matter what the headlines say (1, 2, 3, 4 and many more, even including Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News). They have created a calf that seems to produce milk missing one protein that may be a cause of allergic reactions; but its milk contains greater levels of another protein, casein, that is definitely allergenic.
The research was published in PNAS this week, and apparently most journalists could not resist distorting the facts in favor of a cute story about a techno-fix for the milk allergies that affect between two and three percent of infants, who usually outgrow them. (Lactose intolerance is different, and much more common.)
New Zealand scientists performed a noteworthy technical trick in engineering a cow to produce milk that does not contain the protein BLG. They tweaked a skin cell, then used it to create a clone. As usual, the process was very inefficient: 57 embryos were transferred, five pregnancies resulted and one live calf was born, for some unknown reason without a tail. The Guardian has a reasonable summary, and quotes one of the authors:
We first of all consider our genetically modified cow a great tool to study allergenicity and do not envision any practical application any time soon.
The Los Angeles Times, in an article prompted by this report, did mention the casein problem. Dr. Robert Wood of Johns Hopkins told the paper that it presents "probably the worst-case scenario for most of our patients," since those allergic to BLG are usually allergic to a variety of proteins. But, especially in light of this, the framing of the LA Times piece was shocking:
Scientists fret over FDA slowness on genetically altered animals
The piece is worth reading, however, for a summary of the various attempts to sell us GM and/or cloned creatures as food — cows, salmon, pigs, goats and chickens, not to mention corn and soy and other crops. As though presenting a justification, it notes that "the public routinely consumes processed foods made with genetically modified corn and soybeans." There is, however, no mention of the undoubted fact that many people do not realize that, nor of this article in the same paper a couple of days earlier, about the California initiative to label foods containing GMOs:
Poll finds Prop. 37 is likely to pass
Just because something is an impressive piece of technological wizardry is no guarantee that anyone wants it, or even that it's useful. And journalists have a responsibility not to promote stories about hypoallergenic breakthroughs that are flatly false.
Previously on Biopolitical Times: