Clearing the Air: 13 Common Myths About GMO Food Explained

13 Myths About GMO Food, Debunked

The topic of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) often sparks images ranging from scientists in labs to bizarre hybrid creatures like strawberries fused with salmon. These images have certainly fueled debates over GMOs' safety and ethical considerations. Although controversies persist, it is crucial to unravel the myths and understand the reality behind this biotechnological advancement.

With insights from food systems and sciences, this blog seeks to clarify common misconceptions about GMO foods. While it will not advocate for or against GMOs, it aims to equip you with factual information to dispel prevalent myths surrounding this subject.

The Myth of 'Franken-food'

The term "genetic modification" might evoke thoughts of Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein," suggesting an unnatural mix of body parts held together by scientific tinkering. In reality, the processes and results of creating GMOs are far more precise and controlled.

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are living entities—plants, animals, or bacteria—that have had their genetic codes deliberately altered. A classic example is the rainbow papaya, which was engineered to resist a virus devastating Hawaiian crops in the 1940s by incorporating a small part of the virus's DNA into the papaya genome. Such precision ensures that changes only occur under intentional human intervention.

Another example involves altering gene expressions to achieve a specific result. A case in point is the Del Monte development of a rosé pineapple by modifying an enzyme responsible for color change, resulting in sweeter, pink pineapples. Despite people fearing the creation of monstrous foods, most GMOs remain visually unchanged and undetected until they are studied closely.

Clear Links with Artificial Selection

Artificial selection, introduced by Charles Darwin in the 1860s, is a well-established practice where humans breed plants or animals to highlight desired traits, such as the size of chicken breasts. Genetic modification might appear similar because both processes involve human intervention, but genetic engineering allows changes at the molecular level, bypassing some natural limitations.

For example, if breeding meatier chickens exposes them to cancer risks, genetic modification can maneuver around this limitation by introducing or enhancing genes that promote muscle growth without promoting cancer.

Furthermore, genetic modification enables the introduction of desirable traits from unrelated species, such as the incorporation of daffodil genes into rice to produce vitamin A-rich golden rice—a process impossible with traditional breeding methods.

Not Just a New Technology

Contrary to popular belief, genetic engineering is not novel. The first application dates back to 1973, when scientists Herbert Boyer and Stanley Cohen successfully inserted DNA from one bacterium into another. The first GMO product to receive FDA approval was genetically modified insulin, introduced in the 1980s.

It was in 1994 that the first genetically modified produce, the Flavr Savr tomato, hit the market. Its ability to maintain firmness post-harvest marked the dawn of various GM crops like sugar beets, cotton, and canola. By 2015, the FDA approved the first genetically-engineered animal—the faster-growing salmon.

Concerns About Allergic Reactions

A pertinent concern about GMOs stems from the possibility of allergic reactions due to genetic material from allergenic species. However, there have been no documented cases directly linking GMO foods to allergenic reactions.

The top eight food allergens include gluten, soy, dairy, peanuts, tree nuts, shellfish, sesame seeds, and eggs. While some, like soy, are already genetically modified, altering them does not make them any more likely to trigger allergies than their non-GMO counterparts. Label checks remain crucial for allergy sufferers, regardless of whether the product is GMO.

Labeling of GMO-Containing Foods

The notion that consumers are in the dark about GMOs in their food is now unfounded. By 2022, FDA-required labeling mandates all food manufacturers and certain retailers in the U.S. to disclose GMO content with text, directions for access to bioengineered food disclosures, or the bioengineered food seal.

This move from 1990s' minimal labeling to current practices highlights an ongoing dedication to transparency. However, brands like Trader Joe’s voluntarily opt to avoid GMO ingredients, and certifications like the Non-GMO Project label emphasize compliance with non-GMO standards—though as marketing strategies.

Environmental Impact of GMOs

The environmental effects of GMOs generate diverse perspectives. For instance, Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) corn and cotton benefit the environment by reducing pesticide use, having reduced insecticide applications by 80% from 1996 to 2017. GMOs have also been related to lower carbon footprints, equivalent to taking nearly 12 million cars off roads.

On the other hand, the rise in herbicide-resistant crops can lead to increased herbicide use, raising concerns over soil health and pollution. Hence, assessing the environmental impact of GMOs becomes multifaceted, depending on practices and agricultural applications.

The Nutritional Aspect of GMOs

A commonplace myth suggests GMO foods are unhealthy, yet they are nutritionally comparable to non-GMO crops. Notably, some GMOs might even provide increased health benefits. Research indicates that GM soybean oil may not trigger insulin resistance akin to non-GM variants, thanks to its healthier cholesterol content.

Golden rice exemplifies the nutritional potential of GMOs, offering significant vitamin A content and addressing deficiencies in rice-dependent populations. Nonetheless, definitive human studies remain pending to confirm these prospects fully.

Spreading Genes and Cross-Contamination

Fears persist concerning the potential spread of GMO genes to non-GMO crops, causing "contamination" through pollen drift or seed mixing. Measures like buffer zones and strategic planting schedules mitigate such risks.

It’s significant to know that consuming animals fed with GMO products or GMO foods directly does not equate to genetic modifications within humans or animals.

Organic Food and GMOs

Consumers seeking non-GMO options often turn to organic products, with USDA regulations prohibiting GMO ingredients in certified organic goods. Organic operations must prevent cross-contamination, undergoing routine testing to verify GMO absence.

Testing and Market Entry of GMOs

The perception that GMOs escape adequate testing leans towards conspiracy. In reality, GMOs undergo rigorous testing, requiring company collaboration with the FDA for food safety evaluations and public database listings before approval.

Additionally, USDA’s APHIS assesses disease risks while the EPA examines pesticide usage implications, ensuring comprehensive regulatory oversight involving multiple agencies for safe food production.

Prevalence of GMO Foods

Despite high GMO discourse, a limited number of U.S. crops are genetically modified. However, commonly consumed products like soy, corn, and related derivatives mean GMO foods are prevalent in processed items and animal feed.

As of 2020, significant proportions of soybeans, corn, and cotton are genetically modified, with primary meat sources also relying on GMO feed, underscoring widespread indirect consumption of GMOs.

GMO Foods and Cancer

While rigorous testing discerns potential health risks, no current studies firmly connect GMOs to cancer. In fact, regular consumption of GMO fruits and vegetables may potentially mitigate cancer risks by promoting healthier dietary habits regardless of cost benefits.

The GMO-cancer link stems from isolated lab findings in predefined cancer samples, extending to misleading interpretations of products like glyphosate without causative evidence of heightened cancer risk.

GMOs and Honeybee Populations

The decline in honeybee and butterfly populations is not conclusively linked to GMOs. Research shows that herbicide-tolerant GMOs might not harm bees, with decreased insecticide use potentially benefiting pollinators.

The interplay of factors causing Pollinator population declines, including chemical exposure from both GMO and non-GMO crops, demands holistic consideration beyond simplistic correlations to GMOs.

In conclusion, the landscape of GMO food is intricate, combining scientific advancements with public concerns and desires for transparency. Dispelling myths enhances informed choices and fosters understanding, allowing consumers to navigate their food systems better.

출처 : Original Source

Leave a Comment