Genetically Modified Food: The Benefits and the Risks
Background Genetically modified foods or GM foods for short, also go under many different names, including transgenic food, genetically engineered food or biotech food.
So what are GM foods? Although different people and groups have different definitions, GM foods can broadly define as foods that "are produced from crops whose genetic makeup has been altered through a process called recombinant DNA, or gene splicing, to give the plant a desirable trait." The modification is usually done in the lab using molecular techniques or genetic engineering although there are others who would argue that crops produced through conventional breeding can also be considered as GM food.
The first GM food crop, a tomato developed by Montsanto was submitted for approval to the US FDA in August 1994 and came into market in the same year. As of September 9, 2008, a total of 111 bioengineered food products have completed the US FDA "consultation procedures" on bioengineered foods. In addition to the tomato, the range of products includes soybean, corn, cotton, potato, flax, canola, squash, papaya, radicchio, sugar beet, rice, cantaloupe, and wheat. According to estimates by the Grocery Manufacturers of America, "between 70 percent and 75 percent of all processed foods available in U.S. grocery stores may contain ingredients from genetically engineered plants. Breads, cereal, frozen pizzas, hot dogs and soda are just a few of them."
The benefits of GM foods. Support for GM foods come from different sectors: scientists, economists, and understandably from the agricultural and food industries.
GM foods can fight world hunger. The world population has reached an all-time high of over 6 and a half billion. Over 20% of these are suffering from poverty and hunger. That GM foods can stop hunger is one of the noblest motivations behind the development of GM foods. GM foods supposedly are easier to grow and bring higher yields. In poverty-stricken parts of the world, higher yields can save millions of lives and bring much-needed economic benefits. In a review, Terri Raney of the United Nations says "...the economic results so far suggest that farmers in developing countries can benefit from transgenic crops..."
GM crops are better. GM crops are designed to be sturdier and more robust than their non-modified cousins. They are meant to be resistant to drought, diseases, and pests. The Hawaiian papaya industry, for example, only managed to survive a virus epidemic after the introduction of more resistant transgenic varieties.
GM foods have been with us for hundreds of years. The wide variety of many plants that we see today came about through natural as well as traditional man-made plant cross-breeding that took thousands of years. That is peppers come in different shapes, colors, and taste, from the very spicy hot to the sweet types. That is why we have more than 1000 different types of tomatoes.
GM foods can fight malnutrition. In a world suffering from malnutrition, GM foods can answer the need for more nutritious food. To cite an example, Swiss research strove to create rice strains that contain large amounts of beta-carotene and iron to counteract vitamin A and iron deficiency. Malnutrition can refer to both undernutrition and wrong nutrition. People in rich and developed countries may have more than enough food but not the proper nutrition necessary to keep them healthy. For this reason, researchers at the European-funded FLORA project have developed strains of fruits and vegetables with enhanced content of antioxidants. Through genetic engineering, FLORA oranges have higher than normal flavonoids and phenolics. The FLORA purple tomatoes have three times the amount of the antioxidant anthocyanins compared to normal tomatoes.
GM foods are good for the environment. The damage to the environment that insecticides such as DDT bring about is well-known. The use of synthetic fertilizers in the farmlands led to the eutrophication of rivers and lakes all over the world. GM foods translate into less use of pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers, and therefore less pollution.
GM foods can help medicine. GM foods can be used in producing pharmacological products in the so-called "medical molecular farming: production of antibodies, biopharmaceuticals and edible vaccines in plants." FLORA stands for "flavonoids and related phenolics for healthy living using orally recommended antioxidants" and it sees it self as "a player in the future of medicine." As early as 2005, Indian researchers reported the potential use of transgenic bananas in carrying vaccines against hepatitis B. In the same year, the biotech company GTC Biotherapeutics based in Framingham, Massachusetts has developed a herd of genetically modified goats that produce milk which contains a human anticoagulant called anti-thrombin.
GM foods are safe. The creators of GM crops are quick to assure that GM foods are safe and pose no threat to human health. GM crops are regulated by three agencies: the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the US FDA. "The FDA ensures that foods made from these plants are safe for humans and animals to eat, the USDA makes sure the plants are safe to grow, and the EPA ensures that pesticides introduced into the plants are safe for human and animal consumption and for the environment. While these agencies act independently."
According to the US FDA, "bioengineered foods do not pose any risks for consumers that are different from conventional foods ... We make sure there are no hazards, such as an unexpected allergen or poisonous substance in the food, or that the food is not changed in some way that would affect its nutritional value."
The issues against GM foods.
The opponents of GM foods may be scientists, environmentalists, and of course consumer groups. In addition, many celebrities are openly anti-GM, thus setting role models for the public. Among the most well-known and outspoken GM sceptic is Charles, England's Prince of Wales.
GM foods are for profit. According to its opponents, GM foods were created for profit and nothing else. They cite the multinational giant Monsanto, a pioneer in GM research and owns the infamous Roundup crops. Companies like Monsanto are unlikely in the GM business for purely noble reasons.
GM foods are unregulated. The use of GM foods in the world is almost an unregulated free-for-all activity. Going through the US FDA consultation procedures is mainly voluntary. Anti-GM advocacy groups and concerned scientists are asking for more controls and regulations.
There are also reports of GM plants escaping field trials and finding their way to the natural environment, thousands of miles away. In 2006, rice which contained genes from the bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis (the notorious Bt) found its way to European supermarkets, causing a big outcry. The bacterial gene rendered the rice resistant to insects and the transgenic rice was a test plant that has not yet been approved for human consumption.
GM foods can harm the environment. GM foods are affecting their environment and some of these effects might actually be harmful. The effects are especially evident in other living organisms within the vicinity.
There are concerns, for examples, how cross-pollination with pollens from GM plants can affect non-GM plants.
Resistance development is another major issue. In China, for example, researchers used antibiotic-resistance marker genes to derive resistant transgenic rice strains. There are concerns that the marker genes will be taken up by naturally occurring gut bacteria and lead to resistant, more pathogenic strains.
Other studies also point to possible effects on animal life such as insects which are closely interact with the GM plants. One of the most well-known incidences was the claims that pollens from transgenic corn plants with Bt insecticidal gene markers are adversely affecting monarch butterflies in North America. Although experts say that the butterflies were safe from Bt, environmentalists were not satisfied.
GM foods can be detrimental to human health. The main concerns about adverse effects of GM foods on health are the transfer of antibiotic resistance, toxicity and allergenicity. With genetic modifications come new compounds in the crops which we virtually know nothing about. These compounds may be in the form of allergens and little-known proteins whose effects to human health are difficult to predict. In the food chain, this can even affects animals fed by GM crops and slaughtered for human use.
GM foods are not better. Western Europe is a stronghold of anti-GM movement. A European study last year declared that organic foods - which are exclusively non-GM-, are definitely better and more nutritious than their non-organic counterparts.
Which way do we go? The risks versus benefits of GM food are not an easy issue to settle. There is an urgent need for increasing food production and GM foods seem to be in the best position to address this need. In the short-term, GM foods are probably the solution to food shortage.
Currently, there is not enough scientific evidence to support the possible risks of GM foods. However, like in most things new and innovative, the long-term benefits and adverse effects can only be speculated upon.
Responsibility should be on the scientists, the health authorities, and the industries to act responsibly and to be as transparent as possible.
Genetically Engineered Foods May Cause Rising Food Allergies
Arguments made by the Environmental Protection Agency, which regulates plant produced pesticides, tell us not to worry about the thought of consuming toxic pesticides. Instead, they say that the pesticides used, Bt, are produced naturally from a soil bacterium which has a history of safe use by organic farmers who have used the solution for yeas as a method of insect control. Genetic engineers simply remove the gene that produces Bt and insert it into the DNA of corn and cotton plants, making the plant do the work, instead of the farmer. They also say that the Bt toxin is quickly destroyed in our stomach, and even if it survived would not harm humans or any other mammals. However, these arguments are solely that, arguments, which are unsupported and refuted according to a lot of research.
When a study was done, spraying natural Bt over areas in Vancouver and Washington State for months, about 500 people reported reactions, mostly those being allergy or flu-like symptoms. Six of those people had to go to the emergency room, while workers who applied the Bt sprays reported that their eyes, nose, and throats were irritated. Similarly, farmers who were exposed to liquid Bt said that they had reactions such as infection, ulcers on the cornea, skin irritation, burning, swelling, and redness. One woman even reported fever, altered consciousness, and seizures when she was accidentally sprayed with Bt. This proves that the statements of Bt doing no harm on humans is extremely false. As for being destroyed in the digestive system, studies on mice disproved this as well. Results of these, and other, studies showed that plant-produced Bt is always active and much more likely to trigger an immune response than the natural version.
Additional studies in 2005 reported by medical investigators in India found that hundreds of agricultural workers are developing severe allergic reactions when they are exposed to Bt cotton. This exposure includes picking cotton, loading it, cleaning it, or simply leaning against it. Some people that work at ginning factories must take antihistamines daily in order to go to work. These reactions are only trigger with the Bt varieties and the symptoms are virtually identical to those that were described by the 500 people in Vancouver and Washington who were sprayed with Bt.
Another study was done on the basis that Bt-toxin is produced in GM corn and can be eaten intact. It is also in pollen which can be breathed in. Therefore, a village of Filipino people were studied in 2003 when an adjacent Bt cornfield was pollinating. 100 of these people were stricken with disease which included symptoms such as headaches, dizziness, extreme stomach pain, vomiting, chest pains, fever, and allergies, along with respiratory, intestinal, and skin reactions. The symptoms first appeared in those that were living closest to the field and then progressed to those further away. When the same corn was planted in four other villages the following year, the same symptoms returned in all four areas only during the time of pollination.
All of these studies confirm that GM crops engineered to produce built-in pesticides provoke a great variety of immune responses. Allergic reactions are a defensive and often harmful reaction from the immune system to an external irritant that occur when the body interprets something foreign as harmful and offensive and acts accordingly. Since all GM foods have something foreign and different, it is easy to see why the body would react in such ways.
As the GM foods arise on the market place make sure you scan each label to make sure you are not buying a GM vegetable of fruit. Check every label this way you will not be stricken with debilitating symptoms that may prevent you from going to work. Always say NO to GM foods and support your organic foods store.
Concerns About Genetically Modified Food
“Bt brinjal (eggplant) gets biotech regulator’s approval”, said the headline in an Indian newspaper.
The story went on to report that a key government committee has cleared the way for the first genetically modified food crop in the country. The company producing the genetically-modified eggplant seed says it has been tested for nine years and is fully compliant with guidelines and directives issued by government regulators. They claim that a million farmers will benefit because this strain of brinjal has been engineered to resist common pests that have hindered production in recent years.
Greenpeace India has questioned the bio-safety of this product and asked the government to hit pause and hold off on the commercial sale of this seed. Greenpeace commissioned a study by a prominent French scientist, who concluded that Bt Brinjal may present a serious risk to human and animal health.
Further, environmentalists like Vandana Shiva of the Navadanya movement have objected to genetically-engineered foods for fear of damage to surrounding land. The only other genetically-modified crop in India is a non-food, cotton, and it has increased costs to farmers.
Shiva and other environmentalists also warn of the ingenuity of nature; pest mutations and strains can break through specific genetic modifications. In addition, moralists argue that seeds are nature’s gift to mankind and should not be subject to profiteering by large corporations at the cost of individual consumers and farmers.
How do we, as lay people, react to this debate? I have watched e-mail exchanges on Yahoo groups and noted that while a few people raise concerns, for most of us science is like religion. We barely know enough to understand the positive and negative impact. Many of us view these developments as unstoppable. Helplessly, we are willing to live with the consequences.
To me, genetically modified foods are problematic for several reasons. First, the human body is incredibly complex. I don’t think science understands the way the body works in the same we understand, say, how an automobile works. As an example, on something as basic as our diet, there are varying opinions on the impact of carbohydrates, fats and proteins. We embrace diets that later turn out to be bad for us. Many people know more about what grade of gasoline to put in our cars than what food to put into our bodies.
Second, any impact of genetically modified food on the body could be long-term and difficult to identify. Only after decades of smoking have we realized the ill-effects of cigarettes. Even seemingly rigorous testing has not prevented the release of harmful drugs like Vioxx. In effect, the health of a billion Indians depends on a handful of scientists who are paid by the government to review mounds of data produced by many more scientists paid by drug and food companies.
Third, the best data links intensive, industrial farming using chemicals – fertilizers and pesticides – with soil erosion; the reduction in fertility rates; and barrenness of farmlands.
I recently met Nammalwar, an agricultural scientist who has dedicated his life to promoting ecological farming. He makes a compelling case for going back to nature’s zero-waste design of growing crops, trees and animals in a farm – and allowing the waste of one species to act as a food for the other. His own experiences have shown that ecological farming, at a fraction of the cost, produces much higher yields per hectare than intensive farming.
Human beings have a much shorter time on this planet than the flora and fauna. Until a few centuries back, we battled nature but did not have the weapons to do much damage. Unfortunately, the last two hundred years have led to environmental weapons of mass destruction.
We need a different approach to deciding on the fate of future generations – an approach that is holistic, inclusive and sustainable. Can we really afford to leave it to the hands of a few scientists, economists and politicians? It’s up to us. It’s up to you. What do you think? Share your thoughts and get involved.
Genetic Engineering Supporters Meet at the Vatican/ The Politics of Food Versus God
From May 15-19, the Pontifical Academy of Science is presenting a study week on the topic “Transgenic Plants for Food Security in the Context of Development.” Most of the speakers are internationally known as vehement supporters of agro-genetic engineering. Some of them are in close contact with genetic engineering companies or even work for these firms, such as, for instance, Eric Sachs of Monsanto, the worldwide biggest supplier of genetically modified seeds. So how did it come about that these supporters of genetic engineering are meeting in the Vatican?
Organization and leadership of these days of study is under the direction of Ingo Potrykus. He became famous as the inventor of "golden rice," a genetically modified product that is supposed to counter a vitamin A deficiency. It recently made headlines in China and the USA as a result of questionable testing on children and adults. The majority of the board from the Golden Rice Project will now gather together there.
In November of 2000, Pope John Paul II spoke out against the release of GMOs. During a mass attended by approximately 50,000 farmers, the pope stated that the use of genetically modified plants to increase crop yields is against the will of God. But apparently, the Vatican has now changed its mind.
Toward the end of 2003, there was a conference at the Vatican on the topic of genetic engineering. It was organized by the “Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace.” Its president is known as a proponent of GM technology and during the conference he urged the use of genetically modified food to help find a solution to the world-hunger problem, which he called a paramount goal of the Vatican.
Of course, one question would be whether the Vatican would be willing to haul its gold bars out of the cellar and give them to the hungry. Then the people would have everything they need.
In any case, things have gone so far that the “Pontifical Academy of Sciences” invites supporters of genetic engineering from research and science to the Vatican gardens. This is a clear signal to the global public.
One solution to this dilemma would be to ask all GM proponents to eat only GM foods for 2 or 3 years. Perhaps then, we could see more clearly whether GM products are good for all people. Furthermore, most GMO proponents are Christian. And yet, we can read in the Bible, the following story of creation: “And God saw everything that he had made and behold, it was very good.” (Gen. 1:30.31) So, if it was good, why do we now have to improve it?
Can it be that genetic engineering is not meant to improve God’s creation, but to serve the profit drive of certain large companies? But then why is the Vatican now helping this effort?
For more information go to www.Universal-Life.cc or call 1-800-846-2691.