Genetically Modified Organisms

Grocery shopping is an overwhelming experience, especially when consumers are not aware of what is in their food and what the food will do to their bodies. It is estimated that nearly 70% of all foods at the grocery store contain Genetically Modified Organisms (Odyssey). Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) may be hidden in a variety of routinely purchased foods. While GMOs may be cheaper in price, the real cost comes in the form of consequences to the environment and human health. While many countries and even individual states within the U.S. have acknowledged their danger, the country as a whole has yet to place any restrictions on GMOs. Genetically modified organisms contribute to a variety of health-related issues such as allergic reactions
and toxicity and is a cause for confusion among consumers. These issues can be resolved through a mandatory ban of genetically modified organisms across the United States.
A Genetically Modified Organism, referred to as a GMO, GE (genetically engineered), or GM (genetically modified), come about when a piece of DNA is copied from another organism and inserted into their DNA. The reason for genetically modifying crops is to get the crop to a desirable state. Typically, this means what consumers will purchase in regards to flavor, appearance, and texture. As of right now, the only foods being modified for consumption are crops. However, when used in animal feed, these crops can contaminate their meat. Those involved in the GMO process are scientists who study the process and manipulate the genes and farmers who use GMOs for a higher quality crop yield. However, consumers become involved when it comes to making choices at the grocery store. While genetically engineered crops may seem like a good idea in the long run, they pose a wide variety of issues. The primary causes for the existing issues include but are not limited to the following; plants are modified to contain built-in pesticides, genetically modified crops exist to feed a large, growing population, companies that genetically engineer seeds refuse to believe GMOs cause harm as they profit from these crops, the food industry is pushing against labeling laws and have only compromised on nationwide voluntary labeling, causing alert consumers to purchase foods that they believe to be GMO free when they are not, and finally, The FDA is not required to approve genetically engineered crops. Due to the lack of knowledge among consumers, unforeseen problems may arise. One of a multitude of problems linked to genetically engineered food involves allergy related issues. For instance, if a person were to have a food-related allergy and GMO contaminated feed containing the ingredient were fed to an animal that the individual consumed the meat of, the person could become severely ill and suffer in a multitude of ways (Health Research Funding-HRF). Moreover, studies among animals who had consumed GMOs show shocking results; changes in internal cell structure, abnormal tumor growth, and unexpected death (HRF). What does this mean for humans? The most logical assumption would be that humans would experience similar results that could gradually develop into full on disease, even if the effects are not physically evident at first. At any rate, effects on the human body are not fully understood (Odyssey). This means that the side effects of GMO consumption cannot always be directly linked to their source and are difficult to prevent. Similarly, concerns for genetically engineered foods are that they may become toxic through the engineering process. Because inserting a gene from one plant into another is meant to make the plant have desired effects, an organism can be created that has undesirable effects. A final issue associated with GM foods is the decrease in nutritional value despite popular belief. By inserting genes from an unfamiliar species into that of another species, scientists are allowing a plant to be potentially allergenic to us, as they don't know how the genes will react together within the organism. In fact, there have been no studies showing the exact amounts of toxic residue on crops, and therefore it cannot be proven that GMO crops cannot be harmful to human health (GMO Defined.)
Environmental damage is another primary concern related to genetically engineered foods.
Growing plants in an area in which they are not typically exposed to, the surrounding environment is at risk for potential damage. GMO cross breeding can occur as a result of this. Pollens from a genetically modified crop could carry to a crop intentionally grown without the use of GMOs. Consumers could suffer the effects of GMOs and those who try to avoid GMOs would be unaware they’re consuming them. GMO plants designed to become resistant to herbicides can contaminate weeds and make it necessary for more time and work into GMO efforts and prevention (Pros and Cons of Genetically Modified Foods). Pollen from a GMO designed to be herbicide resistant could contaminate a weed and form a resistance in the weed (Genetically Modified Organisms). These specific weeds are called “Super Weeds,” plants that gain a resistance to herbicides and insects due to contamination by other Genetically Modified plants. GMOs are harming the environment just so that food companies can produce a food that tastes satisfying for a cheap price. In addition, harm could be inflicted upon not only pests, but insects that are beneficial to the farming process. Another environmental concern is if a farmer were to grow GMO crops in one season, but grow crops without the use of GMOs in the following season, GMO traces could return; this would start the cycle of negative effects over
again.
Seeing as many major companies and organizations are against the banning or labeling of GMOs, efforts are still being made by those with major concerns.
¨The Center for Food Safety (CFS) filed a groundbreaking legal petition with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) demanding that the agency require the labeling of all food produced using genetic engineering¨ (The GMO Deception). Dating back to 1992, the FDA said that materially, GE foods are the same as those without. The FDA narrowed the differences to aspects of the food that could be sensed through any of the human senses; however, since GMOs cannot be picked up through these senses, it is not seemingly possible that GMOs can be ¨substantially equivalent¨ (The GMO Deception). The FDA utilizes a voluntary examination process in which companies that develop a GE crop are encouraged to share the data of studies they may have conducted on their GE crop (The GMO Deception). “A recent independent Canadian study found that a toxin from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), which has been engineered into Bt corn, was present in the bloodstream of 93 percent of pregnant women, as well as in the fetal cord blood of 80 percent of pregnant women. These findings cast grave doubt on the biotechnology industry’s assurances-accepted at face value by federal agencies, including FDA- that the genetically engineered Bt toxin would be broken down by human digestive systems before entering the bloodstream… casts doubt on the
wisdom of federal agencies’ practice of relying excessively on crop developers’ own safety assessments rather than on independent studies” (The GMO Deception). This evidence suggests that foods that are deemed “safe for consumption”, are only considered safe due to the lack of research to back them up. As of 2014, the state of Vermont has pressed forward in regards of labeling. Legislation has been signed that allows for Vermont to become the first of the states to make labeling of GMOs mandatory (Genetically Modified Foods Confuse Consumers). “Maine and Connecticut have also passed laws requiring labels, but they don’t take effect unless other states follow suit. The food industry is widely expected to challenge the Vermont law in court. The state efforts aren’t slowing down. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, there are 85 pending GMO labeling bills in 29 states” (Genetically Modified Foods Confuse Consumers). In addition to these efforts, the current number of countries with GMO labeling laws in place is 64; this total does not yet include the United States. There is a multitude of efforts against GMOs from a political standpoint as well. Non-profit organizations, the Non-GMO project, for example, make every attempt to make GMO-free food a reality. On this organization’s website, they directly lay out their beliefs that the organization runs on. They believe in working toward making non-GMO food choices widely available and labeling of the foods that do contain genetically modified organisms, and encourage the restoration of traditional seed breeding by discouraging GMO seeds. Their labels can be seen on the front of packages of companies who have chosen to join forces and participate in the movement. Despite the efforts being made, there is too large and powerful a resistance to have seen notable progress up to this point. The efforts against GMOs have not been sufficient for obvious reasons, that being GMOs are still in much of our food, but underlying reasons, including the FDA refusing to link any negative evidence to GMOs, and food companies continuing to genetically engineer our foods for their profit.
As a country, the Unites States must prevail with our efforts to get rid of genetically modified foods. If these issues are ignored, there could be an increase in allergic reactions and a decline in overall public health. Rashes and breathing issues associated with intake of foreign substances entering the body would cause an increase in issues at medical institutes and scientists trying to stop the issues rather than preventing the issue at the source. GMOs will become increasingly popular among food companies and show up in an even greater number of foods. Another less commonly thought of problem that could show up is the progression in research and studies to use GMOs in new ways. For example, companies could use GMOs to make a higher profit by enhancing aspects of their food to make the food more favorable and addicting. There are certain actions that can be taken by consumers, such as voting to an GMOs through our purchases. Naturally, companies won't produce what they can't make a profit on. In addition, continuing to press forward through petitioning and bill proposal, companies will have no choice but to give in. On the part of the government and food companies, one can only wonder why simply labeling their foods is so hard to do, especially when other countries have done it effectively. Most consumers do not read the labels either way, but by labeling, companies can do a favor to those who want to know what is in their food. For the companies that find it hard to commit to labeling all of their foods, it would be beneficial to offer rewards including cash or tax deductions. Reward efforts such as these have a high probability of keeping companies using reasonable ingredients and methods for a long period of time, which will lead to progression- less struggle in the future. In final analysis, future generations will have to put up the same struggle for GMO banning/labeling and suffer the damage and consequences that the current generation has created and worsened. In order to solve the environmental and health issues associated with GMOs, it takes the involvement of food companies and GMO-banning organizations and requires the FDA to admit to possible negative effects of GE food and thoroughly evaluate all of our products for consumption. Through the process, the standards are set for what is suitable to be released to the public. The figure that represents the number in over abundance of GMOs in America can be reduced through the contributions of those who hold the power, beginning with none other than the consumers. The negative effects posed by GE foods can be solved through a nationwide ban of genetically modified organisms.