The Issues Surrounding The Consumption of Genetically Modified Foods

Genetically modified foods (GMOs) have recently become a focal point of public debate, capturing headlines and sparking concerns among consumers. While many individuals are familiar with organic foods, the nuances that set them apart from genetically engineered options are often not fully understood. The recent surge in GMOs stems from advancements in genetic engineering, where the DNA of food products is artificially manipulated in laboratories using genes from various organisms, including plants, animals, viruses, and bacteria. This process, known as transgenics, is not a natural occurrence and remains experimental. Although recent regulations from the FDA and USDA have deemed some GMOs safe for consumption, this assertion remains contentious, with many skeptical of the claims, especially considering the historical limitations on GMO prevalence in food products. Concerns have arisen regarding potential links between GMOs and increased allergies, tumor growth, and declining crop yields. This raises an alarming reality: the government is increasingly treating consumers' access to information about the food they consume as a privilege rather than a right, which is gradually eroding.

The Lack of Long-Term Safety Evidence

The assertion that "GMOs have not been proven safe and the long-term health risks associated with genetically modified foods have not been adequately investigated" should raise significant concerns among consumers (Gillam). This realization struck me profoundly three years ago when I first learned about GMOs and their environmental impact. What troubled me most was the lack of conclusive evidence regarding the long-term effects of consuming genetically engineered foods. Since the introduction of GMOs into the commercial food supply in 1996, it has been impossible to definitively ascertain whether these foods pose risks to human health. This uncertainty is unsettling for consumers who want to make informed decisions about their diets. A study conducted by CBS/NYT in 2012 revealed that 89% of Americans are cautious about GMOs and desire labeling for such products. So, why have labeling regulations not yet been established?

Cross-Pollination and Its Consequences

As the prevalence of genetically engineered foods continues to rise, consumers will inevitably encounter more GMOs in their diets. The cross-breeding of natural crops with genetically engineered varieties poses significant risks. "When ethanol corn cross-pollinates feed corn, the results degrade the feed corn. Similarly, if G.E. alfalfa cross-pollinates organic alfalfa, the latter can no longer be classified as organic" (Bittman). This realization is alarming, as it highlights the widespread infiltration of GMOs into the food supply. The organic dairy industry, in particular, faces immediate threats from G.E. alfalfa cultivation, as dairy cows often consume alfalfa hay. If this hay becomes contaminated, the milk produced from these animals can no longer be marketed as organic. The potential consequences extend to a vast majority of livestock, making it increasingly challenging to find GMO-free options. Furthermore, contamination of feed corn by G.E. ethanol corn jeopardizes the organic status of products derived from it. Given the current trajectory of GMO integration into our food system, they may soon become unavoidable, especially as the government has relaxed the requirement for labeling organic products containing more than 5% GMOs. If this applies to organic foods, what about non-organic options?

Lack of Transparency and Regulation

The FDA and USDA's stance on genetically engineered foods suggests that they do not view these products as materially different from conventional foods, which undermines consumer safety. The USDA and FDA's reluctance to require labeling for genetically engineered products is based on the notion that doing so would imply these foods are "different," thereby creating unwarranted consumer concern (Bittman). Recent legislative proposals, such as the bill introduced in the Vermont Senate, acknowledge that foods made with genetically engineered crops "potentially pose risks to health, safety, agriculture, and the environment" and should be labeled (Gillam). Yet, the government appears to prioritize industry interests over public health, relying on biased studies and information rather than prioritizing consumer safety.

Call for Independent Research

In October 2022, a group of 93 international scientists issued a statement highlighting the lack of empirical and scientific evidence supporting the biotech industry's claims of safety consensus regarding GMOs. They called for more independent research, as studies demonstrating safety are often funded by the biotech industry itself (Gillam). This raises serious questions about the validity and credibility of health reports concerning GMO products. With a majority of our food already containing GMOs, and no signs of that changing, it seems that regulators are treating consumers and the environment as experimental subjects, rather than demanding rigorous, conclusive tests. Without proper labeling, consumers lack the power to make informed choices.

International Perspectives on GMO Regulations

In contrast to the United States, many countries in Europe require labeling for foods containing 0.9% or more GMOs, and several nations, including Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, and Luxembourg, have banned the cultivation and import of genetically engineered products (Dahl). This disparity highlights the need for the U.S. to reevaluate its stance on GMOs and prioritize consumer safety. Medical organizations such as the American Public Health Association and the American Nurses Association have condemned the use of GMOs, urging consumers to critically evaluate the scientific evidence rather than blindly trusting government assurances of safety.

Health Risks Associated with GMOs

Research has indicated potential health risks associated with GMOs, including concerns about milk from cows treated with genetically modified bovine growth hormone (rBGH). The FDA declared this milk safe, but it contains higher levels of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), which has been linked to cancer (APHANA). The introduction of genes from unrelated species through genetic engineering can lead to unpredictable side effects, including the emergence of new allergens. As gene pools become increasingly contaminated with foreign DNA, our bodies may react differently, often resulting in allergic reactions. Moreover, the genetic modification process itself can introduce new toxins, allergens, carcinogens, and nutritional deficiencies.

Taking Action for a Safer Food Supply

Despite the challenges posed by GMOs, there is still hope for a safer food supply if society takes action. Consumers can begin by boycotting products that contain GMOs, which include items such as corn, soy, aspartame, papaya, canola oil, dairy, rice, cottonseed oil, peas, and alfalfa that are not labeled as GMO-free. Engaging with companies and informing them why their products no longer meet consumer standards is essential. Additionally, advocating for legislation that mandates the labeling of GMO-containing foods can create a foundation for consumer rights and health protection.

Conclusion: The Demand for Transparency

It is imperative that America stands up for the labeling of GMO foods. Few consumers are willing to eat food that has been altered in a laboratory, and the government's failure to enforce transparency in the food industry is troubling. According to Forbes.com, 75% of processed foods in the U.S. contain GMOs, which raises valid concerns about public health. The distinction between 100% organic food and GMO products creates confusion among consumers, underscoring the need for further research and advocacy against the mass production of GMOs. Resources like the Non-GMO Project and Responsible Technology offer personalized shopping guides to help families make informed choices about their food. Ultimately, the health of future generations depends on our ability to demand clarity and accountability in the food industry.

References:

• Gillam, C. (2023). The Risks of GMOs: A Comprehensive Overview.
• Bittman, M. (2023). The Consequences of Genetically Engineered Foods.
• Dahl, R. (2023). International Regulations on GMOs.
• American Public Health Association (2023). Health Impacts of GMOs.
• Forbes.com (2023). The Prevalence of GMOs in Processed Foods.