1
Farmers and agricultural scientists
have been genetically engineering the
foods we eat for centuries through
breeding programs that result in large
and largely uncontrolled exchanges of
genetic material.
International consensus has been
reached on the principles regarding
the evaluation of the food safety of
genetically modified plants.
At an early stage in the introduction of The first successful transformation
recombinant‐DNA technology in
modern plant breeding and
biotechnological food production
systems.
FAO and WHO have been organizing
workshops and consultations on the
safety of GMOs since 1990.
Animal studies are deemed necessary
to obtain information on the
characteristics of newly expressed
proteins, analogous to the
conventional toxicity testing of food
additives.
For many decades, in addition to
traditional crossbreeding, agricultural
scientists have used radiation
In the decades since the first
genetically modified foods reached the
market, no adverse health effects
among consumers have been found.
experiment in plants was in 1988.
Food standards developed by Codex
Alimentarius should be adopted by the
participating national governments.
Testing of whole foods may be
considered if relevant changes in
composition may have taken place in
addition to the expected ones
 2

Longer‐term studies may be needed if The Expert Consultation noted that, in

the results of a 90‐day study indicate general, very little is known about the
adverse effects such as proliferative potential long‐term effects of any foods
changes in tissues.

identification of such effects may be identification of long‐term effects

very difficult, if not impossible, due to
the many confounding factors and the
great genetic variability in food‐
related effects among the population.
Epidemiological studies are not likely
to identify such effects given the high
background of undesirable effects of
conventional foods.
specifically attributable to genetically
modified foods is highly unlikely.
There is generally consistency in the
national approaches to evaluating the
food safety of genetically modified
plants

The concept of substantial equivalence This analytical comparison to assess

is fully endorsed in the European whether or not a novel food product is
approach. substantially equivalent to a product
that is already on the market is

The highest test dosage should be the
maximum amount of novel food
products that can be included in a
balanced animal diet, while the lowest
dosage should be comparable to the
expected amount in the human diet.
If desirable safety factors cannot be
reached in this way, additional
investigations on resorption and
metabolism of the novel food in
animals, and eventually humans.
 3

The exposure assessment should For the nutritional assessment, it may

include specific vulnerable consumer be necessary in some cases to set up
groups. post‐launch monitoring programs.

Also, with relation to allergenicity, the The safety of our existing foods is based
EU largely follows international on long‐term experience and history of
consensus reports in that potential safe use, even though they may contain
allergenicity should be investigated anti‐nutritional or toxic substances
with the available means, to avoid the
introduction of new allergens into the
food supply.
In the past decades progress has been In many cases beneficial compounds
made with respect to identification may also exert adverse effects
and characterization of food
constituents which may exert adverse
and/or beneficial effects on chronic
intake.
57 percent of Americans said it’s scientists wrote that they “found no
generally “unsafe to eat genetically substantiated evidence that foods from
modified foods.” GE crops were less safe than foods from
non-GE crops.”

GM crops can improve yields for The agency also approved

farmers, reduce draws on natural AquaAdvantage Salmon, a salmon
resources and fossil fuels and provide designed to grow faster than non-GMO
nutritional benefits salmon.
 4

the scientific and political discussions Thus the OECD concept of generally
surrounding GMO foods aren't going
away any time soon.
GMO crops didn’t increase those
crops’ potential yields, and they did
lead to widespread and expensive
problems with herbicide-resistant
weeds.
GE crops paired with their pesticide
counterparts wreak havoc on the
environment through: Increased
herbicide use.
recognized safety of the existing food
supply will undergo further refinement
in the light of growing scientific
evidence for the biological relevance of
specific food constituents.
There is always uncertainty about
safety, of course, but there’s no
evidence of harm.
crops aren’t designed to increase yields
or resist drought. Instead, most are
designed to resist continuous doses of
toxic herbicides like glyphosate.

GE crops are responsible for U.S. government regulators continue to

increasing herbicide use by some 527 approve GMO crops.
million pounds in the U.S. over the
first 16 years of their commercial use.

The GE crops in our food system don’t They have, however, helped farmer
improve on the crops’ potential yields. protect yields from insects and weeds.
 5

Small-scale farmers may have trouble

GE crops can, however, help protect seeing those economic gains because of
the price of seed and lack of access to
yields from pests. credit.

Ongoing public conversations about the biggest use of GMO technology is in

GE crops and related issues should be large-scale agricultural crops.
characterized by transparency and
public participation.

Both GE & non-GE crops with There’s no evidence that GE crops have
increased conditions of some increased potential yields
nutrients could have favorable effects
on the health of millions of people.

insects can develop resistance to Bt For crops that are tolerant to

glyphosate, the herbicide in Roundup,
the story gets more complicated.

While those crops initially decreased in many locations some weeds have
overall herbicide use, the report says evolved resistance to glyphosate.
those decreases have not been
sustained.

The highest test dosages should be
the maximum amount of novel food
product that can be included in a
balanced animal diet
The minimum duration of an animal
study with whole foods to
demonstrate the safety of long‐term
consumption of a food depends on the
available toxicity database for the food
under investigation.
There’s no evidence of adverse effects
of Bt crops on honeybees.
more than 300 “scientists and legal
experts” signed a ‘no consensus on
GMO safety’ statement
No patterns of changing cancer
incidence over time are “generally
similar” between the US, where GMO
foods are ubiquitous, and the United
Kingdom, where they are virtually
unknown.
6
the lowest dosage should be
comparable to the expected amount in
the human diet.
Better weed management has to go
hand-in-hand with the deployment of
herbicide-tolerant plants, the report
finds.
prohibitively difficult or expensive”
without the weed control that comes
with herbicide-tolerant crops.
Based on USDA survey data, the
percent of domestic soybean acres
planted with HT seeds rose from 17
percent in 1997 to 68 percent in 2001,
US rates have barely budged over a
quarter-century.