Genetically modified food has been around for a few decades and the amount of food that contains DNA modifications is increasing day by day. Almost 70% of the food in this country has been altered in a certain way. Most of this type of food is not labeled, so people don’t really know that what they are eating is composed of some kind of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This new method of making food is done by various mechanisms in multinational corporations known as agricultural-biotechnology corporations. The problem is that not everyone knows exactly if there are any benefits or risks in consuming GM food or even what GM food is. There have been some cases where it is believed that diseases have originated because of this food, but it has not been completely proved. No matter what, people have the right to be aware of what their food is made of. There is not enough research that certifies the safety of inserting genes into foods. Consumers should at least have the opportunity to choose whether they wish to purchase genetically engineered foods or not, therefore everything must be labeled.
Genetically modified food is derived from GMOs, which are organisms produced by using genetic engineering techniques, such as gene splicing, where biotechnologists modify DNA by inserting an enzyme into the genes or biolistics, where the selected DNA is attached to microscopic gold particles and then shot into the target cells using a burst of gas under pressure to bacteria, plants, mammals or fish, to change a certain physical property or capability of it and that it has the ability to transfer this modification to one organism to another (Better Health). Hence, GM food can be done by various processes and for different purposes, for example, by inserting a virus or protein in order to make a plant resistant to herbicides or pests, to create its own insecticide or to contain higher amounts of vitamins.
Some of the advantages of GM foods are that they are resistant to pests and herbicides. Tons of chemical pesticides and herbicides are used annually to inhibit the growth of pests or weeds in crops. Run-off of the agricultural wastes of these chemicals can poison water supply, harm the environment and it also has the potential to create health hazards to people, but altering the genes of food has made it possible to lower these risks as well as to save money and time to farmers and consumers. Other benefits are cold tolerance, which means that plants can resist lower temperatures without dying as well as drought and saline tolerance (CSA Illumina 2). Because population continues to grow and land is being used for housing, places that are not suitable for crop production, will provide hospitable locations for this crops to withstand long periods of drought or high salt content in soil in other places of the world like Africa, where the climate it is very unstable and where food it is more needed than anywhere else. Another advantage is that food is composed with more nutrients that are essential for the human body and phytoremediation, which is a process of using plants to clean up polluted soils and water (CSA Illumina 4). One of the most outstanding benefits is that it could end or at least diminish world hunger because plants are able to grow faster and are more nutritious than ever before. Among other advantages are enhanced taste and quality, increased yields, reduced maturation time and conservation of soil and water. Of course, there are also some disadvantages for the environment, humans and the economy when we consume GM food. Environmental hazards include reduced effectiveness of pesticides because insects could become resistant to crops that produce their own pesticide, unintentional harm to other organisms, which means that some toxins or bacteria that are introduced into foods can injure other species, like the case of Bt corn that caused high mortality rates in monarch butterfly caterpillars, that even though they do not consume corn, the pollen of this plant is blown by wind onto milkweed plants in neighboring fields where the caterpillars could eat the pollen and perish (CSA Illumina 5). And gene transfer to non-target species that could create weeds to become immune to herbicides. Scientists believe that this type of food does not have many human health risks, just the possibility to develop allergies. Some economic concerns are that if the new varieties of plants are patented, prices of seeds would go higher, making it very difficult for developing countries and small farmers to afford these seeds(CSA Illumina 7).
According to the government its regulatory system to release any type of food into the market is ‘’transparent, predictable, open to public comment, and based on sound science. It is continuously reviewed and evaluated to ensure that it meets the challenges of this evolving technology.’’ (Gay 45). In other words, it announces that there are enough procedures that guarantee the food we consume is harmless. There are three government agencies that have control over GM food, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) which limits the amount of GM crops cultivated in farms to prevent insects to become resistant to a pesticide or herbicide for which the agency has four categories: product characterization that includes examining the source of the gene and how it can manifest in an organism, toxicology where an oral test of the pesticidal substances is made on mices, effects on non-target organisms, and exposure and environmental fate (Borem, Santos and Bowen 68). The U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA) executes tests, issues permits to grow GM crops and research GM food, but, if the plant is not toxic to other organisms or if the genetic material introduced into the plant is stably integrated into the plant’s own genome (the entire genetic complement of an organism) or the purpose of the gene that was introduced is known or it doesn’t cause disease or creation of viruses and finally if the GM plant doesn’t contain genetic material from other animal or human pathogens, then the GM plant doesn’t require a permit (PEW Charitable Trusts 12). The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) determines whether the plant is safe for human consumption, however, companies that produce GM food are not required to consult the FDA before it is released for commercialization, therefore it is up to the company to do it or not (Food and Drug Administration).
The FDA claims that there is no point to label genetically engineered food because it is not different from conventional food, therefore it does not have any health risks to humans and it would be a waste of resources to do it. The major concern is that it would cost a lot of money and for no good reason since they are generally recognized as safe (GRAS). Current regulations in the US require labeling of GM food if they pose a health risk or if the nutritional value of the product has changed (Food and Drug Administration; PEW Charitable Trusts 15). Another reason for not wanting to label this food is that since it would be more expensive, the consumers wouldn’t be interested in buying it and that’s not what the companies want. However there have been some documented cases where people have developed allergies for being exposed to GMOs. In 2004 and 2005 several agricultural workers in India complained of allergies associated with Bt cotton, which is cotton that is genetically engineered with Bacillus thuringiensis that makes the crop create its own pesticide. The laborers reported itching, redness and swelling, followed by skin eruptions, sometimes severe enough to force them to stop working. All of these reactions coincided with the introduction of Bt cotton and were not experienced beforehand (Smith 31). In the US an illness known as eosinophilia myalgia syndrome (EMS), which is an immune disease that causes severe muscle pain due to an increase in the amount of white blood cells called eosinophils in the blood, was acquired by approximately ten thousands of individuals in the 1980s because of an altered bacteria used in the production of L-tryptophan (LT), an amino acid that is present in some foods, such as turkey or milk and that was made to produce this supplement more economically. After it was discovered that this was what possibly caused EMS, it was banned from sale in the United States as well as in other countries (Smith 61). Humans are not the only ones that have been harmed by GMOs, but animals have also been affected by them by making the animals sterile, to develop allergies or to die. These show that GM food is not as safe as the FDA claims it to be. Therefore labeling this food must be mandatory. The consumers have the right to choose what they want to purchase and no government agency has the right to deprive them from knowing what is in the food they eat. A survey made in 2002 in Iowa and Pennsylvania showed that 92% of people supported labeling GM food and that Americans remain relatively uninformed about this food (Gay 82). ''In order not to kill this technology we must gain consumer acceptance and we must aim for the common ground,'' (Burros 1). And labeling genetically engineered food will achieve in increasing public confidence about it.
Changing the genetic material of the food that we eat it is something really innovative and probably something that people thought would never happen just a few years ago, but biotechnology has made it possible for it to occur and even though it hasn’t been around for too long it has proved that it has more advantages than disadvantages. Before food goes to the market it has to go through some agencies in order to be approved, but the FDA doesn’t require the food to be labeled because they think that it would confuse the consumers that there are harmful health effects where in fact there aren’t. However we have the right to know what’s in our food, especially if some concerns have been raised for products that could potentially cause allergies or other types of diseases in humans and mandatory labeling would give us the choice to select what we want to eat without worrying if the food has GMOs or not. It is the government’s job to protect its people, therefore it has to demand the FDA to do more research and laws about how food is processed before it is determined as safe.
