Due to recent legislation that was presented to the U.S. to the Senate, requesting that all Genetically Modified Organisms be labled clearly for consumer awareness, GMOs have become something of a twitter and facebook buzz word. But...not really. I still find that the a good number of people I speak with aren't really aware of what GMO means, or entails as far as our food supply. So, 90% of the US citizens surveyed wanted labling for all GMO products, were the rest of us just asleep? That is very likely....
So, what is a GMO and how rampant is this issue?
According to the World Health Organization: Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) can be defined as organisms in which the genetic material (DNA) has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally. The technology is often called “modern biotechnology” or “gene technology”, sometimes also “recombinant DNA technology” or “genetic engineering”. It allows selected individual genes to be transferred from one organism into another, also between non-related species.
Okay. Wait a minute. Non-related species? This all seems eerily familiar....Oh right. They did it in Jurrasic Park. You all saw that movie, right? Micheal Crichton....DECADES ahead of his game. He warned us then and we just sat back and shrugged, hoping that maybe one day dinosaurs really would be brought back to life, no doubt. (Pet T-Rex anybody?)
So, why modify food?
Again, from the World Health Organization: GM foods are developed – and marketed – because there is some perceived advantage either to the producer or consumer of these foods. This is meant to translate into a product with a lower price, greater benefit (in terms of durability or nutritional value) or both. Initially GM seed developers wanted their products to be accepted by producers so have concentrated on innovations that farmers (and the food industry more generally) would appreciate.
The initial objective for developing plants based on GM organisms was to improve crop protection. The GM crops currently on the market are mainly aimed at an increased level of crop protection through the introduction of resistance against plant diseases caused by insects or viruses or through increased tolerance towards herbicides.
Insect resistance is achieved by incorporating into the food plant the gene for toxin production from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (BT). This toxin is currently used as a conventional insecticide in agriculture and is safe for human consumption. GM crops that permanently produce this toxin have been shown to require lower quantities of insecticides in specific situations, e.g. where pest pressure is high.
Virus resistance is achieved through the introduction of a gene from certain viruses which cause disease in plants. Virus resistance makes plants less susceptible to diseases caused by such viruses, resulting in higher crop yields.
Herbicide tolerance is achieved through the introduction of a gene from a bacterium conveying resistance to some herbicides. In situations where weed pressure is high, the use of such crops has resulted in a reduction in the quantity of the herbicides used.
That doesn't sound so bad...does it? Cheaper food, higher nutritional value, bigger crop yeilds because of disease resistance? But..there has to be more to the story, right? What does WHO have to say?
While theoretical discussions have covered a broad range of aspects, the three main issues debated are tendencies to provoke allergic reaction (allergenicity), gene transfer and outcrossing.
Allergenicity. As a matter of principle, the transfer of genes from commonly allergenic foods is discouraged unless it can be demonstrated that the protein product of the transferred gene is not allergenic. While traditionally developed foods are not generally tested for allergenicity, protocols for tests for GM foods have been evaluated by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and WHO. No allergic effects have been found relative to GM foods currently on the market.
Gene transfer. Gene transfer from GM foods to cells of the body or to bacteria in the gastrointestinal tract would cause concern if the transferred genetic material adversely affects human health. This would be particularly relevant if antibiotic resistance genes, used in creating GMOs, were to be transferred. Although the probability of transfer is low, the use of technology without antibiotic resistance genes has been encouraged by a recent FAO/WHO expert panel.
Outcrossing. The movement of genes from GM plants into conventional crops or related species in the wild (referred to as “outcrossing”), as well as the mixing of crops derived from conventional seeds with those grown using GM crops, may have an indirect effect on food safety and food security. This risk is real, as was shown when traces of a maize type which was only approved for feed use appeared in maize products for human consumption in the United States of America. Several countries have adopted strategies to reduce mixing, including a clear separation of the fields within which GM crops and conventional crops are grown.
Feasibility and methods for post-marketing monitoring of GM food products, for the continued surveillance of the safety of GM food products, are under discussion.
Wait...allergies? Allergies aren't so bad right? Take a benedryl, go about your day? Wrong. Allergens in foods, mostly affecting children if you remember from my previous posting, can lead to serious issues with malnutrition and severe allergic responses including death. And you'll note, that with outcrossing, it's becoming almost impossible to stop the cross breeding of these new items, to ensure a non-GMO product. They work on it but...nature has a way of winning out. Again...Jurassic Park ring any bells?
But, aren't GMOsNON-GMO. No required labling has been passed to date. As I stated in a previous post...largely due to corporate greed on behalf of the lobby representing the major GMO producing coorporations (MONSANTO...if you don't know this name by now, you seriously should do some homework).
Here is the rest of the WHO article I've pulled some of my information from. Look it up and decide for yourself what you deem to be safe, and why you think that our governmenet will not insist on labels: http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/biotech/20questions/en/
No comments:
Post a Comment