Yves Champey ~ Full interview

Advisor to the Director General of Evry Genopole in France

1.  What are in your view the most urgent problems in the field of health?

Access to health tools, health research, the results of research especially of biotechnology to developing countries, which represents 90% of the world population. Furthermore we have to make a lot of effort in the prevention of metabolic diseases. For example, we have to research the elements of obesity, the origin of diabetes and health-administration: why aren´t they able to cope with these issues? And we have to educate different groups of the population.

2.  And except for research are there things we already can do right now?

We need more education, more information and more pressure on the food and agro industry. There are a lot of lobby groups working in these fields and that is where our politicians get their information from. That is a major deficiency in our decision-making systems regarding choices in health, prevention, and research subjects. The same has happened with the tobacco industry for the last 40 years. Most information came from the tobacco industry itself, but we learned that was not enough to make decisions concerning the health of people. Now we stand for the same in the field of food. We know what we should do, but we do not do it.

3.  What are the lessons learned from the tobacco debate that we can now use for the food industry?

We know that the medical profession is the last to react on information that is well known. We know that politicians have been very slow to react. We have spent a large amount of funding on molecular biological research regarding the consequences of smoking, when prevention of smoking would have been much more efficient. We know this and can learn from it. It took gigantic effort by some countries over the last 40 years to come to where we are today. And this is still insufficient, because 30% of our young population is still smoking. And now the same is happening with obesity. With the difference that obesity is a problem for the whole world, while smoking was restricted to a rich part of the world for a long period of time. Obesity now is an even bigger problem than tobacco ever was.

4.  What are the necessary conditions for the solutions?

The first effort is to get a high level of consciousness by politicians about the importance of certain problems and questions, because they make the decisions on for example budgets. So they must be well trained and informed and should know what they are talking about. And they should not base their decisions on papers written by the tobacco, agro or food industry.

5.  Do you think there are any biotechnological solutions for the problems?

In treatment, biotechnology can contribute a lot; in prevention probably not. We are very far from food with low energy levels in the future. So biotechnology can play a role in treatment. And it can play a role in the production of nutraceuticals, food with medical qualities due to specific nutrients like proteins and amino acids. But it will probably be restricted to rich communities, because it will be a costly treatment. It is difficult to imagine that this will be a solution in developing countries, where obesity is a big problem as well.

6.  Do companies also use GMO with the production of nutraceuticals?

Yes, but this may pose problems in societal acceptance because of the quality of information we receive. To my knowledge there is no demonstration of risks related to human health in the use of GM organisms in food production. But still the possibility of risk is largely amplified by the media, with no scientific basis. That is the situation we are in now.

The problems begin with the education of politicians. They should not be under the pressure of lobby groups and advisory groups. They should have a scientific base for their decisions.

We can deal with this through education and information. It will not be enough, but it is a beginning. Plus we need more research about the safety or toxicity of GMOs. We must get a clear sight on the real situation rather than depending on pieces of information which are biased or misinterpreted. In France the National Institute for Agronomical Research gives scientific information on GMOs, but that institute is totally paralyzed by activist groups. They don’t even think about discussing the subject. And that is a pity, because researchers are precisely those able to give the information. I think that France is not the only country where this happens. Politicians sometimes have difficulties resisting these pressures.

7.   Do you think that biotechnical subjects should be placed higher on the agenda?

Probably yes, because this industry is active, entrepreneurial and explores many different situations. They represent the future of many industries like food, agriculture and health. The resources and means should therefore be more important.

8.   And what in your view will the field of health look like in 20 years time?

We will probably devote 20% of Gross National Product to health in rich countries. It is difficult to say if the problems I mentioned will be solved. In theory,yes, if education and information improve like we discussed. But we don’t know what will happen. There will also be a lot of ethical questions. For example, how should we deal with human population diseases like rheumatology as opposed to orphan diseases, where we have a small group of people having the benefit of treatments that are sometimes extremely expensive? We know that there is no ethical answer to this. And that is why we are going to spend more and more on health. But it the future will be extremely interesting for some industrial groups for new research activities and new products.