Genetically Modified Food: Safety Issues’, Essay Example

When you purchase meat, produce, and dairy products, are you aware that Monsanto Corporation or other similar companies have likely altered the genetic composition of your food, the animals that produced it, as well as the seeds that grew it? Since 1996, a great many of the products that are consumed in the United States today contain genetically modified ingredients, typically without our knowledge (Shah.) The issue has become controversial because of significant questions about the safety of genetically modified foods. Most recently, there has been some, though not enough, public outcry regarding labeling of foods so that the public can be educated about exactly what the contents of its food products are. In California, the population has become so concerned about genetically modified food that the issue will be on the ballot this November. Proposition 37  requires “labeling on raw or processed food offered for sale to consumers if made from plants or animals with genetic material changed in specified ways” and in addition, it would prohibit marketing “such food, or other processed food, as ‘natural.’” (Bittman.) Opponents of genetically modified food believe that such tampering with nature risks creating serious health problems including infertility, immune dysregulation, and accelerated aging (Armstrong.)   Supporters of genetically modified products argue that they guarantee and sustain food security globally while reducing the need for pesticides. In addition, it is argued that this process will improve the taste and quality of crops, cut down on the time it takes for them to mature, and improve resistance to disease, pests, and insecticides. This paper, will support the thesis that genetically modified food presents significant threats such as creating antibiotic resistance, introducing allergens and toxins to foods, as well is presenting the risk of inadvertent contamination between genetically modified foods and non-genetically modified foods.

The term “genetically modified organisms,” or GMO’s, is frequently used to describe crop plants that are developed for human or animal consumption involving the latest molecular biology methods. Such plans have been changed in the laboratory to optimize desirable characteristics, including heightened resistance to pesticides or enhanced nutritional content (Whitman.) This improvement of desirable characteristics was formerly undertaken through breeding, but traditional plant breeding procedures are extremely slow, and frequently inaccurate.When referring to food safety, this is the condition that guarantees that food will not cause harm to the consumer when it is prepared or consumed according to its proposed use.

As described in the film The Future of Food, a group of powerful corporations have taken over the food supply, injecting pesticides, viruses, and alien genes into crops, destroying careers of farmers and using every method imaginable–threats of lawsuits, intimidation, and bribery–to develop monopolies over the food supply chain. These actions have created a series of health risks connected with genetically modified foods: one of them is unintentional harm to other organisms, as described in a study by “Nature” which found that pollen from genetically altered corn caused high mortality rates in monarch butterflies (Monsanto et al.)

The controversy about genetically modified foods is a global one. In fact, although the United States has only recently begun to address this problem in any kind of formal manner (California), internationally, the issue has been raised since the 1990s, specifically in the European Union where it has remained in a stalemate since 1998. The debate began over a corn product that had been genetically modified and which began a battle between countries over who were in favor of it versus who wanted to ban it (Copland.) Ultimately, it was decided that individual European nations were able to decide whether or not they wanted to grow crops or plants that were genetically modified. Nevertheless, many questions abound regarding how to safely incorporate genetically modified organisms into the food chain: if these procedures can be regulated, who are the experts? How reliable are their theories? Can people actually speak knowledgeably about this new technology or are they representing it with confidence that is simply not justified? (Ruse.)

The supporters of genetically modified foods have many substantial arguments upon which to base their position. The most compelling grounds involve the economics and novelty of the products offered and their ability to meet the demands of the growing world population’s hunger needs that will facilitate an adequate quality of life (Ruse.) In addition, the farm- and food-based industries such as beef, poultry, fruit, and vegetables, which depend on the availability of natural resources, are confronting new obstacles regarding land and water supplies. In addition, global climate change has resulted in the deterioration of water and air-quality because of air pollution as well is the erosion of topsoil so that the need for genetically modified products is tremendous in these areas.

In addition, there are many other advantages to the use of genetically modified organisms, which are cited by its supporters. In addition to the previously mentioned benefits to crops, GMOs are also seen as advantageous to animals regarding increased resistance, productivity, hardiness, and efficiency in feeding, more plentiful yields of meat, eggs, and milk, and improved animal health, and diagnostic procedures (Genetically Modified Foods and Organisms.) In addition, genetically modified organisms are viewed as advantageous to the environment because they create eco-friendly bioherbicides and bioinsecticides, provide conservation of soil, water, and energy, bioprocessing of forest products, improved management of natural ways and more efficient methods of processing (Ibid.)

A balanced discussion about the use of genetically modified foods was presented on a PBS/Nova program, which featured both corporate executives from Monsanto as well as farmers, promoting the use of genetically modified crops; by reducing the need for pesticides, they claimed, they could both preserve the environment as well as feed the global community (Palfreman.) In addition, genetically modified technology was predicted to save lives by placing edible vaccines inside fruit to fight disease in developing countries. The opposition, portrayed by organic farmers, as well as organizations such as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, worries that by redesigning plants using genes from other organisms or species, unintended and unanticipated consequences deemed as “reckless” may have a disastrous impact on nature as well as the environment.

It is very concerning that regardless of all evidence supporting the potential deleterious effects of genetically modified products, the United States lags far behind many other nations regarding awareness of the issue and determination to address it. This is in contrast with those described in the actions of the European Union nations. While those countries have not uniformly decided on policies regarding the use of GMOs, at least it is clear that there has been ongoing debate with each country making their own determinations about how to regulate or ban the use of these products. Instead, it is only in California that there has been a clear public effort to find solutions to these problems in the form of labeling and right to know what is in consumers’ food products.

The potential harmful effects of using genetically altered organisms far outweigh the potential benefits, especially in the developed nations. These negatives full into several distinct categories:

• Safety, the potential human health hazards including allergens, antibiotic resistance and other unknown effects; and potential environmental effects, including unintentional transfer of genes through cross-pollination, undefined impact on other organisms, such as soil microbes, and loss of biodiversity in flora and fauna;
• Access/intellectual property, i.e. the domination of world food markets by a few large companies like Monsanto; a rising dependence on industrialized nations by developing nations; and foreign exploitation of natural resources;
• Ethical Issues, including violation of natural organisms’ inherent worth, interfering with nature when mixing genes amid species, and stress for animals;
• Labeling, which is not mandatory in some countries, including the United States, as well as combining genetically modified crops with non-genetically modified products, making it virtually impossible for accurate labeling; and
• Society, where new advances may be slanted towards the interest of richer countries (Genetically Modified Foods and Organisms.)

Given all the objective evidence about the dangers of using genetically modified products in the food chain, it seems incredible that the United States has not taken a more aggressive approach to address this issue as well is to educate the public about the potential dangers involved in maintaining the food system as it currently exists. California has taken a lead in promoting labeling efforts in order to help people make healthier choices about the foods that they purchase and consume, and there is no reason why the rest of the country cannot follow suit. Other developed countries, such as many of those in the European Union, have taken action towards this end, and it is certainly in the best interests of our country to focus attention on how to keep the public healthier by consuming foods that are not genetically modified. One only has to look at the high rates of illness in this country, both chronic and terminal, to draw some significant conclusions about the contribution of our diet to the onset of disease. Diabetes, cancer, and autoimmune diseases are prevalent in large numbers in the United States, and it would certainly benefit all if a commitment could be made to cut down on and ultimately halt the development and use of genetically modified organisms in our food supply.

Works Cited

Armstrong, Amy Dean and Jennifer. “Genetically Modified Foods.” 8 May 2009. American Academy of Environmental Medicine. 16 September 2012 <http://aaemonline.org/gmopost.html>.

Bittman, Mark. “GMOs: Let’s Label ‘Em.” 16 September 2012. The New York Times. 16 September 2012 <http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/15/g-m-o-s-lets-label-em/>.

Copeland, Blythe. “Genetically Modified Crops Banned around the World.” 8 September 2010. Tree Hugger.com. 12 September 2012 <http://www.treehugger.com/green-food/genetically-modified-crops-banned-around-the-world-slideshow.html>.

Federoff, Nina. “Engineering Food for All.” The New York Times 19 August 2011: A 23.

“Genetically Engineered Crops.” 2012. Center for Food Safety.org. 16 September 2012 <http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/campaign/genetically-engineered-food/crops/>.

“Genetically Modified Foods and Organisms.” 17 May 2012. Genomics.Energy.gov. 16 September 2012 <http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/gmfood.shtml>.

Harvest of Fear. Dir. Jon Palfreman. Monsanto et al. 2001.

Parekh, Sarad. The GMO Handbook: if you Genetically Modified Animals, Microbes, and Plants in Biotechnology. Totowa: Humana Press, 2004.

Ruse, Michael. Genetically Modified Foods: Debating Biotechnology. Amherst: Prometheus , 2002.

Shah, Anup. “Genetically Engineered Food.” 26 September 2002. Global Issues.org. 16 September 2012 <http://www.globalissues.org/issue/188/genetically-engineered-food>.

The Future of Food. Dir. Deborah Koons Garcia. Perf. Deborah Koons Garcia. 2004.

Whitman, Deborah. “Genetically Modified Foods: Harmful or Helpful?” April 2000. Pro Quest. 16 September 2012 <http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/gmfood/overview.php>.