Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)

Genetically modified crops are a topic of intense debate that have sparked a lot of controversy over the years,
fuelled largely through a lack of understanding and vast amounts of misinformation. Do we need GM crops? Are
they dangerous? This article is going to give a brief overview of this huge topic and also discuss some of the myths
and facts of GMOs.
What Are GMOs?
Humans have been modifying the genomes of plants and animals for our benefit for thousands of years using a
process known as artificial selection, or selective breeding. This involves selecting organisms with desirable traits
and breeding them so that certain characteristics are perpetuated. This could be a teacup dog, a cow with
improved milk production or a fruit without seeds. However, this is limited to naturally occurring variations,
which is where genetic engineering has found a place.
Genetic engineering allows us to introduce genes into an organism from a totally unrelated species which is
commonly carried out on crops, agricultural animals and bacteria. These genetically modified organisms (GMOs)
are designed for many reasons, including: pesticide and disease resistance, drought/frost resistance, increased
yields, enhanced nutritional content and as a way to produce drugs or vaccines at low cost on a large scale. When
most people consider GMOs they think of agriculture, but the medical implications are wide ranging. For example,
genetically engineered bacteria now produce insulin, saving the lives of millions of type 1 diabetics.
Why Do We Need GMOs?
While it is true that a major problem with feeding an over burgeoning global population relates to the distribution
of the food that we do produce, if population growth does not slow down then we are going to need to find new
ways to meet food demands. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN has estimated that we will need to
grow 70% more food by 2050.
There are several ways that this could be achieved. We could destroy valuable rainforests to make way for
agricultural land, but I dont need to go into the reasons why we should not do this. We could stop eating as much
meat, given that the crop calories we feed to animals could meet the calorie needs of 4 billion people, but few
are willing to do this and meat consumption has quadrupled in the last 50 years. We could invest more in
hydroponics (growing crops efficiently indoors, without soil), which is what many countries are looking into. Or
we could create GM crops.
Many things threaten food security, such as crop or animal diseases, pests and climate change. Weather is
becoming more unpredictable and extreme weather is becoming commonplace which is taking its toll on farmers
worldwide. The idea behind many GMOs is to address these problems.

Tomato with blight. Image credit: Downtowngal, via Wikimedia Commons.

Examples of GM Crops
An excellent example is golden rice. Around 250 million children are vitamin A-deficient in the world, which kills
and blinds millions each year. While supplement distribution programs exist, theyre expensive and difficult to
sustain. The solution? Golden rice.
Researchers added two genes to white rice, one from a soil bacterium and another from the daffodil, which
synthesize a precursor of vitamin A called beta-carotene. This pigment makes various foods orange and hence

makes the rice appear golden. The daffodil gene was later swapped for a corn gene to further increase the amount
of beta-carotene produced.
White rice is a staple food in many countries but its not usually a source of vitamin A. One bowl of golden rice
meets 60% of a childs daily vitamin A needs. However, this product has been met with significant opposition,
especially from Greenpeace, mainly because many people believe it will lead to widespread acceptance of GMOs.
The fact remains: its a viable solution to a real world problem. It was also developed by foundation-funded
academic researchers and a nonprofit organization, not a big private corporation.
You may also be surprised to find out that around 85% of corn grown in the U.S. is genetically modified. Soy is
also heavily genetically modified; one particular soybean was engineered to produce high levels of oleic acid
because it is thought that this may lower LDL cholesterol, or bad cholesterol.
Controversies Surrounding GMOs
There are many controversies surrounding this topic. Some are complete myths, while others raise valid issues.
Labeling
It is estimated that as much as 90% of commodity crops used in the U.S.s food supply are genetically modified.
Few people are aware of the extent of GMOs because the food industry does not label them through fear of
sparking safety concerns in customers. Some have suggested that labeling would be like putting a skull and
crossbones on packaging; however, people argue that they should be able to know what they are eating so that
they can make an informed choice.
Mandatory label laws have come into place in certain countries, but they have not resulted in the anticipated
reaction. Instead, they have led to an increased pressure for retailers to stop stocking GM products which has
reduced consumer choice and at times raised prices. It should be stressed that despite decades of testing, there is
no evidence that genetically modified foods are intrinsically more dangerous or worse for you than unmodified
food. This fear-mongering then, can come across as anti-science.
Transparency is a hallmark of good science, but when the public does not fully understand the topic it can fuel
fear. Mandatory labeling is therefore a complex issue with valid points from both sides. "GMO" is a fairly
meaningless term when applied alone. Genetic modification is just a technique, it is not inherently dangerous. As
with all techniques, it's how it's used that matters. Labeling food as "GMO" wouldn't tell you how it was modified,
just that it was. A food label with "GMO" written on it really doesn't tell you anything more than "there's science in
this food".
Risks To Health
While the genes inserted into organisms occur naturally in other species, there are concerns that altering the
natural genome may have unknown consequences. For example, modifications may change the organisms
metabolism or growth rate. There are also concerns that GM foods may expose new allergens to humans or
transfer antibiotic-resistant genes to the bacteria naturally found in our gut.
A lot of fear was sparked about the safety of GM foods after a scientist named Gilles-Eric Sralini published
a study that found rats fed with Monsantos glyphosphate-resistant corn developed more tumors and died earlier
than controls. After these results, many demanded tighter regulations whereas others called for an outright ban on
the corn. However, numerous problems with the study came to light which led to its retraction from the journal.
First off, Sralini is an outspoken anti-GMO activist. At the time of initial publication he had conflicting interestshe was releasing a book and a documentary on the research. For the experiments, Sralini used Sprague-Dawley
rats that are prone to developing spontaneous tumors. He also only used 10 rats for each group, for a period of two
years which is almost a rats lifespan. The study was described as a "statistical fishing trip" by reviewers - if you
test enough variables for long enough, you'll get a result from something. This is not good science. The
recommendation for carcinogenicity studies is that 65 or more of each sex should be used. There is a high
probability that the results were due to chance.
Furthermore, there have been mounds of better designed studies that have found no health issues, further
suggesting that poor study design is the likely reason for the results, not the GM maize.