Since most of our “food” is genetically modified, why not label it as such and give us the choice of eating it or not?
In his critically acclaimed documentary GMO OMG, Director Jeremy Seifert investigates Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and the dangers they bring by exploring their relationship to his 3 young children and the world around him. In the plot summary on IMDb, written by anonymous, we learn that:
“Today, in the United States, by the simple act of feeding ourselves, we are unwittingly participating in the largest experiment ever conducted on human beings. Each of us unknowingly consumes genetically engineered food on a daily basis. The risks and effects to our health and environment are largely unknown. Yet more and more studies are being conducted around the world, which only provide even more reason for concern. We are the oblivious guinea pigs for wide-scale experimentation of modern technology.”
GMOs are a controversial and hot topic. The issues raised, however, are not new. Many of the fruits, vegetables, and even animals we eat have been crossbred or cross pollinated (same species only) by farmers for thousands of years. Genetic engineering, on the other hand, is a very different ball of wax. We now introduce genes from different species (including animal and human genes), into vegetables and fruit. This can help with resistance to drought, infestations and frost as well as allow for larger yields with less chemicals, which is very attractive to food producers. However, if we have fruits and vegetables with their own internal foreign genes and pesticides to better handle the elements and prevent insects from eating the “food,” what does it do to us, humans, when we eat then them?
And just what are the Pros and Cons of Genetically Modified Foods?
Main benefits of GMOs
1. Better overall quality and taste.
We can now manipulate flavors through genetic modifications to make them sweeter or spicier as well as difficult flavors more palatable.
2. More resistant to disease.
Since we are manipulating their genetic codes, plants and animals can become more resistant to disease by having the “vaccine” built into the genetic code.
3. More nutritious.
We can now add vitamins and minerals to GMO foods by genetic modifications and provide greater nutritional benefits to those who eat them. How that changes the nature of these foods and the long term impact on us is not known.
Main detriments of GMOs
1. Damage to the environment.
When you grow plants or animals in environmental conditions that would not normally support them, you run the risk of altering them irrevocably in ways that will damage both them and the environment. These genetic manipulations create plants resistant to herbicides that then require more GMOs and more pesticides, which further pollutes animals and plants, our bodies and the environment.
2. No real economic benefit.
Since growing GMOs takes as long and requires as much effort as growing non-GMOs, there’s no real economic benefit here, although there are cases of better yield.
3. Growth in allergic reactions in the human population.
Consumption of GMO foods increases the risk of food-based allergies in people. This happens when people eat genetically modified plants as well as the animals that feed on them.
4. Growing resistance to pesticides and medicines.
When you manipulate the genes of plants and animals to be pesticide and disease resistant, you also create bacteria, viruses and insects that are resistant to pesticide and chemical medicine (i.e. antibiotics). That requires the development of stronger and stronger pesticides and drugs, resulting in super bugs that cannot be defeated easily (if at all).
As in any evaluation of a complicated issue, a risk utility analysis is the smart way to go. And this is exactly where we should be with GMOs. This analysis must have at least three components:
1. Meaningful and complete disclosure of all relevant information on the genetic modifications involved, why they are necessary, and the effects of these modifications on the products and environment.
2. Detailed and explicit labels to inform people exactly what it is they will be consuming if they buy and eat these “foods.”
3. Clinical trials and studies with humans to determine the precise risks and benefits of consuming these genetically modified foods, both short term and long term.
Clearly, we cannot make intelligent decisions and choices about anything in our lives without factual and proper information. GMOs have the potential of solving food production, malnutrition and hunger challenges in a world with an exploding human population and an ever-increasing need for food. Since there are serious dangers that come with manipulating genetic codes of plants and animals (that do and can harm humans as well as the animals, plants and environment we depend on to produce them), we must make sure this process is safe. We must also give people the choice of whether they wish to eat these foods or not. The only sensible solution is to make sure we have well-informed consumers that are able to make smart choices.
Video & Screenshot: TheHealthRanger /YouTube Photo2: Cosmic Cine /Flickr Photo2: Denise Jones /Flickr
More Current Affairs Bite This Week
3/5 a Person, Ferguson and the Banality of Racism
Who Needs to Shop on Thanksgiving?
Annual Thanksgiving is Good, but Daily Gratitude is Better
All I am saying is transparency is the rule. GMOs producing companies must provide the information so we can choose not to eat these foods and you can choose to eat them. You keep saying the information is out there and it is simply not. There are no long term studies in humans on the effects of eating these genetically manipulated foods nor is any of it disclosed on the labels.You are arguing for no information on GMOs and keeping it a secret and that may work for you but it does not for most. Information allows one to make… Read more »
Seeing that the source of information comes from Organic Consumers Assoc., Greenpeace, Non-GMO Project says it all. A bit ironic that you speak of other people towing the “corporate line”.
It is also important to note the following: 1. It is not the job of consumers to point out the dangers in GMOs but that of the producers to show they are safe. It is similar to drug companies that have to conduct clinical studies to show their drugs are effective and safe while disclosing all their side effects. No one is asking patients to do that! 2. Long term human studies (scientific not anecdotal as quoted above in Henry’s comment and not ones to show higher yield, we know that, we need studies to show safety for humans long… Read more »
1)GMO’s have been proven safe. Here’s the farcical part of your argument. You state we’re just spewing corporate lines. We’re spewing reality. You don’t want to believe it. When the producers of GMOs provide evidence they are safe, they are rebutted with cries of corporatism and profiteering. I.e., you say “they should prove GMOs safe” … but when they do, you call them liars. I linked to a meta-analysis of 147 independent scientific analyses of the impact of GM crops. Here’s another link to a study of billions of livestock health outcomes when fed GM, non GM, and mix feeds… Read more »
Although interesting to get these points of view (Mark and Henry) who seem to tow the corporate line and express concerns mainly relevant to those who engage in those genetic manipulation practices, you simply miss my point and defeat yours. If there is nothing dangerous about GMOs than why not disclose the information? And yes farmers have been manipulating plants for many years but no cross species. That is recent. You might want to eat a tomato with fish genes in it, and so might I, but I want to know what I’m eating. If you do not, don’t read… Read more »
I sympathize with the motivations expressed here. However, before I can agree or not, I would HAVE to hear a definition of “genetically modified” in this context. There is a HUGE range of what you could call genetically modified. So, before labeling, we need to know what the threshold is. Are we just talking about recent, extremely radical modification, or ALL organisms that humans have shaped through technology. Every plant or animal domesticated in the past 10,000 years has been “genetically modified” in some way. Our ancestors did it by selective harvesting, pruning, and selective planting. I’m guessing that’s not… Read more »
Tsach, You’ve perpetuated a dangerous myth. I’ll assume that you’ve simply not investigated the topic, rather than that you’re willfully ignorant. You should be aware that the link you provide to the “Pros and Cons of GMOs” does not cite any scientific sources. There are many, many studies in peer-reviewed literature, the vast majority of which are methodologically sound, that show GMOs are perfectly safe for human consumption. There is really not any debate left to be had on this specific aspect of this topic. GM technology as a technology is perfectly safe. As with all tools (which is all… Read more »
You missed the point. Maybe you didn’t read the whole article since it was not about the film but mentioned it as a starting point of debate and information quest. This is about making sure we have the information about what we are eating. It’s about scientific studies that are lacking and labeling of food that is lacking. This is a very important issue since we all have to eat and what we put in our bodies determines our health and well being. Your point of not posting it for debate is a strange one, unless you are happy not… Read more »
Tsach, while I sympathize with your concerns about health and the environment, and I’m passionately in favor of truth and transparency, I have to agree with the other posters: the four objections you raise are simply not substantiated by any data. Which is why I think – sorry – that you are the one who has missed the point about making *informed* decisions. Let’s take the word “informed” literally: it means having or based on *information.* You criticized one of your own readers (tsk!) for “believing advertising as your source of informed decisions.” But his source, rationalwiki.org, is anything but… Read more »
I find it a little hard to believe this got posted here, but feel free to sit down with a point by point refutation of the scare mongering that is that film.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/GMO_A_Go_Go
I’ll wait.