If you have shopped in a grocery store within the last six months, you have undoubtedly come across products displaying the label “non-GMO” or “GMO-free,” meaning they are not genetically modified organisms. For years past, genetically engineered food has been thought of as a sort of “Frankenfood” by the public. However, contrary to this seemingly popular belief, the technology’s monumental promise is clearer than ever before.
The biggest issue regarding genetically modified crops is that people do not understand what GMOs are, and this misinformation is leading them to ignorant and uneducated beliefs. However, this is not totally the fault of consumers, as the suppliers of such crops have failed to adequately inform their clients, harboring rumors and distrust in GMOs.
Let us recall and consider an incident that has affected many of us on campus: Chipotle and norovirus. Chipotle recently released a public statement about their decision to not use GMO ingredients. Subsequently, a lawsuit was filed against Chipotle for false advertising and deception, as their meat, cheese and soft drinks all include GMO ingredients. Soon after, Chipotle took another hit when consumers became ill with food-related sickness. Ultimately, more than 300 people have been sickened by Chipotle’s food, and none of the illnesses have been related to the GMOs. Chipotle is quickly learning that their business model is not effective, and they must rethink their values and their ingredients.
According to the Institute of Food Technologists, in the U.S., GM crops are reviewed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for safety prior to being put on the market. There is a hefty period of review and consultation, and once satisfied, the FDA tells developers that they have no more safety questions about new GM crops. From there, the U.S. Department of Agriculture approves the crop for marketing, as long as their own review and consultation reaches the same conclusion about environmental safety. Finally, for some items, such as insect repellent, even the Environmental Protection Agency is involved. Furthermore, GM crops have successfully increased harvests by decreasing losses to pests, decreasing input and labor costs, reducing the impact from agrochemical use, helping conserve soil and water resources and conferring a number of environmental and sustainability improvements.
Based on this, one might ask what the controversy is all about. Unfortunately, there is an overabundance of websites and readings that discuss the disproven studies about the harmful effects of GM crops. More importantly, media and science consumers, and essentially anyone who eats, need to be cognizant of the fallacies that come from anecdotes like, “As soon as I stopped eating GM foods, every allergy I ever had went away.” If you need a true anecdote to think about, look no further than the Chipotle story above.
GMO means progress. The Canadian company, Okanagan Specialty Fruits, recently developed a gene variety that prevents food spoilage and waste, including bruising and browning. Researchers at the University of Missouri and Kansas State University are breeding pigs that combat a respiratory disease which not only kills piglets, but costs the pork industry over $600 million every year.
The Institute of Food Technology states: “A recent NPD food market research study on GMO awareness and concern among consumers finds that 67 percent of all primary grocery shoppers are not willing to pay a higher price for non-GMO foods.” This is an important finding that highlights the need for the world to be more informed on the consequences of non-GMO.
The issue of global food security is undeniably an issue of grave importance. There is even a class here on campus designated entirely to it. Recently, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office have released the winners of the 2015 Patents for Humanity Award, which is an award that recognizes patent owners working to improve health on a global level. Among these winners was the Golden Rice Project. The Golden Rice Project produces a GM crop that accumulates provitamin A in grain, and is destined to feed countless numbers of starving individuals. It is available for humanitarian use in developing countries, free of charge. According to its website, the Golden Rice Project “is based on a widely recognized need for a sustainable biofortification approach to contribute to alleviating the scourge of micronutrient deficiencies worldwide.” In an age of pure technological innovation, denying the efforts of GM crops like golden rice would mean denying a humanitarian project that would save and improve millions of lives.
Finally, I leave you with this: Many people don’t want GMO food, but they will certainly take the medicine they need to cure an illness. This medicine was systematically formulated, engineered and manufactured in a lab, a process fundamentally identical to producing GMOs. We are irreversibly shackled to Pseudoephedrine, Acetaminophen and Ibuprofen, but three simple letters cause pandemonium? Running for the hills when seeing “GMO” will not make your food any healthier or the world any safer. In fact, continuing to condemn these letters will probably result in the exact opposite.
Olivia is a freshman majoring in psychology and computer science. How do you feel about genetically modified organisms? Let us know at opinion@dailycardinal.com.
