Why the anti-GMO movement is not scientific, and not founded in Genesis

  1. Lots of organic food is treated using a technique called “mutation breeding” — where scientists essentially use the traditional method of picking the best crops, but with a twist: use radiation to intentionally increase the chance of mutations! Basically, you’re eating mutant food, except that these mutations aren’t as controlled as something created with more sophisticated biotech.
  2. RoundUp is considered to be quite safe
  3. Organic foods tend to contain organic pesticides that can be quite bad
  4. It’s also not necessarily better for the environment because it doesn’t reduce pollution: Although runoff from pesticides and herbicides might be a danger to the environment, EPA regulations are already quite strict and most farms seem to be isolated (imagine a giant swimming pool with plants growing inside) so major runoff disasters seem to be the exception, rather than the norm. So when someone buys organic food because they think it’s better for the environment, they might have otherwise tried to push for environmentally friendly laws, e.g., special taxes that require organizations (and people) to pay money for each ton of pollution, trash, CO2, etc., that they release (not to be confused with Carbon Credits — which seem to be pretty misguided and quite ineffective on a cost-benefit analysis)
  5. If you’re concerned with experimental pesticides and herbicides that are being used in foreign areas, well — fighting for organic foods isn’t going to help — the primary reason those faraway lands are being used to test them is because they’re illegal (or restricted) to be tested in the United States — so maybe we should instead help them overturn those paranoid laws so they can test them without damaging the environment.
  6. It doesn’t support “the little guy” Did you know that the main producers of organic food are huge corporations that own huge amounts of stuff? Actually, they’re the same corporations that have been producing conventional food, but organic food can be more profitable, in part due to “mutation breeding” as discussed earlier.
  7. According to the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the consensus on GMO safety is firmer than for “Human-Induced Climate Change”

Btw, If you’re a Christian — eating “natural, organic foods” might even be against what you (should) believe

In the third chapter of Genesis, God said

“…cursed is the ground because of you;

in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life;

thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;

and you shall eat the plants of the field.

By the sweat of your face

you shall eat bread,

till you return to the ground,

for out of it you were taken;

for you are dust,

and to dust you shall return.”

According to this quote — food is difficult to grow naturally because it was artificially designed this way by an all-powerful God. Using scientists in laboratories all over the world to get around those artificial limitations (such as bugs that try to eat the food, or other useless plants that try to outcompete the ones we want) doesn’t seem like that technology will create something less healthy or “artificial” — what’s really “artificial” and less healthy is the food that “organic” farmers grow (or technically — the huge corporations that many organic food buyers are ironically trying to fight against)

The magic of science