Genetically Modified Foods

Genetically Modified Crops (GM Crops) are created by splicing alien fragments of genetic code into the genetic code of a plant or animal to produce certain desired characteristics. For instance, soybean plants have bacterial DNA spliced in to make them resistant to the powerful herbicide Roundup. That bacterial DNA ends up in your food (along with some toxic Roundup as a bonus).

There are advantages to GM crops, but also problems, both known and unknown. Their long term effects on health and the environment are nearly impossible for us to know, especially because vast amounts of money are involved. Photo, Griffin from throne room of palace of Knossos, by Paginazero distributed under license Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported.

About 75% of packaged foods you may purchase in supermarkets contain genetically modified material, mostly from Canola Oil, Corn and Soybeans. These foods are very difficult for a normal consumer to avoid. So what food crops are currently genetically modified in North America?

Canola Oil: About 80% of all canola grown is GM. The whole difference between Canola Oil (FDA approved for human consumption) and Rapeseed Oil (considered toxic) is from the GM modification.
Corn: Sweet corn (corn on the cob) and canned corn are almost all non-GM, but corn for food processors (corn chips, tortillas, etc.) and for animal feed generally is.
Soybeans: About 90% of all soybeans grown in North America.
Potatoes: Some Atlantic, Russet Burbank, Russet Norkatah and Shepody. Planting of GM potatoes has declined due to consumer resistance.
Tomatoes: Including cherry tomatoes - but GM tomatoes are no longer planted due to consumer resistance.
Squash: Some Yellow Crookneck, possibly some Zucchini.
Sugar Beets: The courts have declared the USDA violated regulations in allowing planting of this crop.
Papaya About 50% of Papaya from Hawaii is GM. No way to tell it from the non-GM. Mexican papayas are a lot bigger anyway.
Cotton: This includes cotton seed oil used in many processed foods.
Vegetable Rennet: The non-animal coagulant used to make cheese for vegetarians (and everyone else since animal rennet is in short supply) is produced by genetically engineered bacteria.
Vitamin B12: There is no significant natural non-animal source for this critical vitamin. Strict vegans depend on B12 produced by genetically modified bacteria.
rBGH/rBST: This hormone, injected into cattle for faster growth, is produced by genetically modified organisms. This controversial substance is found in meat and possibly milk (G14).
Salmon: Not yet approved except in Canada, this very fast growing Atlantic salmon is the GM animal closest to U.S. approval.

Labeling

Foods containing GM material must be clearly labeled in Europe. In 2016 a GMO labeling law was passed in the US (G12). This law nullified all stricter laws enacted by states. The required labeling is anything but clear, and can be in formats that can only be read by electronic equipment most consumers do not have.

The requirements called for by the law are extremely loose, and no penalties are provided for ignoring the law entirely. It is significant that all sponsors of this law were Republicans, and the law was approved by Monsanto, the major producer of Genetically Modified seed.

The only significant enforcement is FDA regulations requiring Certified Organic growers to keep their products GM free. Whole Foods Markets has partnered with a non-GMO program to certify products as non-GMO (through inspection, documentation and genetic testing) and apply a non-GMO logo to them. Chances of getting a European style label for products containing GM ingredients in North America is about zip. Too many people vote for Republicans, most of whom are totally owned by the agriculture cartels and other factions of the 1% (and some Democrats also are).

rBGH/rBST is an artificial bovine growth hormone produced by genetic engineering. Several dairy states have passed laws that forbid labeling dairy products as from cows NOT injected with rBGH/rBST. In Ohio this law has been defeated in the court of appeals, but producers are still required to have on no-rBGH labels a disclaimer saying "According to the FDA, there is no significant difference between the milk from cows injected with rBST compared to those not injected" - for a rather loose interpretation of "significant".

Why Genetically Modified Crops?

Crops are genetically modified to make them resistant to certain herbicides, diseases or insects, or to make them grow faster and larger or grow in climates where they normally do not do well.

One of Monsanto's major reasons for genetically modifying crops is to make them resistant to a powerful herbicide they manufacture and sell called Roundup. Massive doses of Roundup are sprayed on crop fields to kill all the weeds, leaving the GM crop untouched. The result is, of course, the natural development of super-weeds that eat Roundup for lunch. Some farms have had to resort to manual weeding - not seen in big agriculture for many years. Even more serious, a major study has now linked Roundup to birth defects (G11).

The USDA has done nothing about this and the predictable response of corporate agriculture has been to spray more herbicides, and more dangerous herbicides, increasing pollution of the environment and contamination of your food. In contrast, the FDA has maintained an effective program to prevent development of super-insects.

Are GM Foods Safe?

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine have released a rather comprehensive report, after listening to representatives of all sides of the controversy. Included were even some of the most shrill of the anti-GM partisans. The report (G13) was released in May 2018.

One of the most significant findings was from comparison of chronic diseases in the United States where GM crops are very common, and in England where GM crops are almost unknown. No statistically significant differences were found. This report, however, will not be the final word.

The long term safety of foods produced by genetic modification is unknown - they haven't been produced "long term".
Just because current GM crops are thought safe, doesn't mean all future ones will be.
Genetic material from GM crops migrates to non-GM crops and contaminates the genetic pool. This is now happening with corn in Mexico, the center of genetic diversity for corn.
Much controversy has been over glyphosphate, the major component of Monsanto's Roundup herbicide. Glyphosphate is rather safe compared to many other herbicides, but Roundup is a blend, not just glyphosphate. Statistically significant birth defects and miscarriages have been noted in field worker families in Canada and Argentina (G11). Super-weeds are forcing resort to more herbicides and more dangerous herbicides. This forces up the cost of growing the crops, and further enriches Monsanto.
GM crops greatly reduce genetic diversity and expose the food supply to the possibility of monocrop disasters. When the courts ruled the FDA had illegally approved GM Sugar Beets, the crop could not be returned to normal because there was far too little non-GM seed still available.
Much of the available research is unreliable, because it has been financed by the GM industry to prove their safety. The USDA and FDA rely on this research for regulation.

Why can't we trust GM research more?

It's not just GM research, it's all research on food safety and nutrition. Corporations involved are extremely wealthy and able to buy as many scientists as they need to "prove" whatever they want to prove, and as many politicians as they need to enforce their desires.

Well, we all know about politicians, but why are so many scientists so easy to buy? Research scientists produce no revenue. Their projects are expensive and totally dependent on grant money. Scientists depend on that grant money not only to fund projects, but for their very sustenance. Grant money comes from wealthy and powerful organizations that want a particular result from the research. Wrong results - no more money.

Grant money is often laundered through seemingly neutral organizations to conceal from the public where it comes from, but the scientists receiving the money are usually pretty aware of where it's coming from, what is expected of them, and what the consequences are if they come up with the "wrong" answer.

If a research report shows one positive outcome and a hand full of negatives, affected corporations will ballyhoo the positive in their promotions and simply not mention the negatives at all. If a scientist publishes a wrong answer, the involved industry may deploy other scientists to destroy their reputation and career.

Is the corporate world really so corrupt and uncaring that it will knowingly risk our health and our very lives for profit? If you really need to ask that question, you either just arrived from Mars or depend on Fox News for everything you know.

Consumer Resistance Continues

While 90% of American scientists are reported to consider GM foods safe, only 35% of American consumers do. Due to consumer pressure in Europe, GM labeling is required there, and at least one producer of GM seed there has ended all GM activity due to extreme consumer resistance.

On the Plus Side

The Vegan diet would be pretty much impossible without vats of hard working GM bacteria producing vitamin B12 for supplements. This vitamin, essential to the brain and nervous system, has no natural vegan source. Without it, Vegans would flake out totally.

Cheese would also be much less available, as the supply of animal rennet is inadequate. GM bacteria are producing plenty of non-animal rennet to take up the slack.

Some important drugs are also being produced by designer bacteria in quantities difficult or impossible to find in nature.