GMOs’ Place in All of Our Lives

You need to take the time to learn about the little-understood technology of genetically modified food.

Do people have a right to know what they are eating? Why is a private company from the food industry suing the state of Vermont? Why is there concern over our current food system in the face of climate change?

To answer each of these questions and more, we need dive into the polarizing topic of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). A GMO is something that has been genetically engineered in a laboratory. Through the process of gene splicing, the DNA of one species can be inserted into another. For example, a protein found in a species of fish can be inserted into the genetic material of a tomato or strawberry seed in order to protect the fruit from freezing. A common example is in which DNA from soil bacteria and e. coli bacteria are spliced into corn to create Roundup Ready Corn, a popular crop engineered by the company Monsanto. This technology transcends natural cross-species reproduction limitations. In recent years, the products of this engineering technique have been gaining increasing press coverage and facing building public concern worldwide.

To begin with, in a climate-changing world, agriculture is the focus of much concern. As temperatures and typical weather patterns shift, crops that have been grown in an area from generation to generation are becoming unsuccessful. Many experts fear severe food shortages. Farmers in Bolivia depend on the wet seasons to begin in early fall; yet December arrives with still not a single rain event. Farmers in India depend on monsoons, but climate change renders monsoon patterns unsupportive of traditional agriculture. Increasing temperatures in the United States are set to cause declines in corn and soy yields. The solution, according to some of the most powerful voices in the food industry, is simple: genetic engineering.

GMOs can be specifically designed to be resistant against the effects of climate change, which is seen through the development of heat- and drought-resistant seeds. Furthermore, genetically modified (GM) seeds can decrease farmers’ needs to spray pesticides and fertilizers. Reduced pesticide and fertilizer use makes a significant impact on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, in addition to causing less water pollution. Thus, GM food is being championed as our food system’s savoir, advertised as the only way to continue agricultural production in this changing world.

Climate change is only exacerbating food shortages that our world is already seeing. There are massive populations of hungry and malnourished peoples. GM technology should pave the way to feeding these populations, reducing costs for farmers if they do not need to purchase and spray chemicals, while increasing yields. Furthermore, GM technology has produced options such as Golden Rice, which could provide an essential nutrient to those who do not sufficient supplies of Vitamin A. As of now, the world is not necessarily seeing these benefits, though. Often cited is the case in India, where, with or without GMO technology, so many continue to go hungry. And GMO technology is receiving a lot of push back from the general public, preventing innovations like Golden Rice from being released.

Scott Poethig, a plant geneticist based at the University of Pennsylvania, who regularly produces GMOs for his research, helps make sense of the public’s concern. Poethig responded to a question by explaining that, although consumers often do not understand the technology used to create products, there is a different kind of nervousness that arises when it comes to not understanding how their food was created. Poethig says, however, “the public should judge the product, not the method by which it is produced.”

Regardless of opinions about the scientific research and technology behind the creation of GMOs, there are widespread calls for labeling. Many people believe that they have a right to know whether a food product that they are purchasing contains GMOs. While he is not against the technology in and of itself, Poethig is in favor of labeling GMO products. “People should know what they are eating and decide,” he says.

Following the lack of success for a nationwide GMO labeling policy — largely blocked by industry lobbying — the state of Vermont took its own steps on this matter. On May 8, 2014, Vermont passed a law requiring GM foods to be labeled. On that day, Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin tweeted the following: “Proud to sign #GMO labeling into law in #vt. Those opposed will put up a fight. Help us fight back #righttoknow.”

The largest food lobby group in the nation reacted quickly to this by filing a lawsuit, citing food companies’ right to free speech. But again on June 18, 2015, Governor Shumlin tweeted, [email protected], label your products. All of them, nationwide. 64 countries do it. Let’s make #USA #65. #VT will not abandon GMO labeling.” Vermont will not give up this fight, hoping to be a model for a nationwide requirement on labeling. Challenges to the Vermont law by the Grocery Manufacturers Association, of which the notorious Monsanto is a member, will begin on July 1st, 2016.

There is a powerful other side to the labeling debate, though. Not only are the food industry lobby groups fighting in opposition to labeling mandates, but other food system experts are advising against it as well. There has yet to be any convincing, unbiased research showing negative health effects of consuming GM food. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the American Medical Association (AMA), and the World Health Organization (WHO) have endorsed the technology behind GMOs. Especially if there is no nationwide mandate, advocates for small farmers in their own state do not want labeling laws. A mandate would pose a burden on farmers in one state not faced by similar farmers in other states, and could be detrimental economically. Labeling food would increase costs for the farmers and decrease sales if these labels scare people. In a recent opinion article for Bangor Daily News about embracing GMO technology in Maine, Lauchlin Titus argued the following: “Forcing our food producers to label their produce infers the product is unsafe, when it is not. That’s misleading and unfair to everyone in Maine.”

GMO food products are a topic that has very little hard, unbiased evidence regarding effects for both humans and ecology. Until that research can be produced, it is left to the consumers to try and grapple with both sides as best they can in order to form an opinion.

Poethig wanted to finish with the reminder that, “as a point of fact, about 95% of the corn, soybean and cotton crops in the US are GM, and over 2,000 products in your supermarket are made with these ingredients.” GM foods are all around us in the United States, so it is time to get educated.