Chapter 14

Genetically Modified Organisms as a Food Source:

History, Controversy, and Hope
Patrick L. Daubenmire*

Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry, Loyola University Chicago,

See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.
Downloaded via CHALMERS UNIV OF TECHNOLOGY on August 25, 2019 at 18:15:24 (UTC).

Chicago, Illinois 60660, United States

*E-mail: pdauben@luc.edu.

Chances are you have consumed a genetically modified organism (GMO) or at

least the product of one. At the turn of the 21st century, more than 100 million
acres of agricultural land in the United States were seeded with GMOs and over
90% of the strains of corn and soybeans planted were genetically modified. This
chapter shares some brief information about the history of GMOs and discusses
the controversial aspects of their use and applications.

Early Food Cultivation

Maybe it is a bit ironic, but climate changes that occurred some 10,000 years ago provided the
appropriate conditions for early humans to begin cultivating food. An increasing number of humans
placed depleting pressures on wild food sources. This drove the need to grow food instead of finding
and capturing it.
The climate changes also provided conditions that led to the natural selection of traits in plants
that could withstand extremes in environmental conditions, surviving in dry times and sprouting
in wet times. Such changing conditions allowed for domestication, partly because humans could
selectively breed for traits that improved the endurance of crops. Agriculture was born.
Fast-forward to the green revolution of the 1950s and 1960s and we can see how the
combination of chemical technology with high-yield crops produced more food than was thought
possible. The Haber–Bosch process provided more readily available (fixed) nitrogen that plants
desperately needed. Food growth boomed and many third world countries overcame food deficits.
However, there were consequences, too. Hunger still persisted. Crop monocultures, which
diminished species diversity, began to dominate. By attempting to ensure sufficient nutrient
availability, lands were overfertilized, which led to threats not only to crops but to entire ecosystems.
The question of how and how much to use the advances of science and technology to solve our food
problems was laid bare. For more on the history of agriculture, please see Chapter 3 in this volume by
Sarkadi, “Impact of Agriculture on Food Supply: A History.”

© 2019 American Chemical Society

Orna et al.; Chemistry’s Role in Food Production and Sustainability: Past and Present
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2019.
 Genetic Modification
We have known for some time that inside each living cell is a guidebook known collectively as
a genome. The genome is divided into short sections of chemical codes that provide instructions
governing specific reactions or processes in the cell. These sections of code are the basic units of
heredity, known as genes. These genes are housed in long molecular strands called DNA and dictate
the traits and characteristics that are expressed in organisms. With each replication, this information
gets passed on cell to cell, generation to generation. If a gene changes, traits change and the altered
information is passed along to the next generations.
From a crop standpoint, traits that support robust and sustainable growth are desirable. Such
crops also need to contain nutrients and taste good. Our ancestors were well aware of this, too.
Although they did not have the technology to genetically alter organisms, they did have the
wherewithal to selectively breed crops for desired traits. This led to at least one critical food
transformation, that of a measly grass with small kernels into a crop with large stalks and ears that we
call corn. Thousands of years have passed, and technology has advanced to the point where we can
now intentionally alter and engineer genes.
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are the result of humans directly manipulating genes
in a laboratory, generally by inserting a gene into the host organism’s genome to express a trait
not normally expressed by that organism. The first genetically engineered organism, an antibiotic-
resistant bacterium, is credited to Hebert Boyer and Stanley Cohen in 1973 (1). It was expected that
more engineering would follow and the technology would expand.
As with other scientific and technological opportunities, ethical quandaries quickly arose around
recombinant, or altered, DNA—man’s engineered recipes for gene expression. The Asilomar
Conference on Recombinant DNA convened in 1975 gathered scientists and medical doctors to set
the protocols and practices for genetic modification and manipulation (2). For example, guidelines
were established to create biological barriers that would limit the spread of changed genes. This
often meant using a bacterium in the experimental phase that could not survive in a natural setting.
The members of that conference concluded that there is significant risk in altering the DNA of one
organism with that of another because there can be unknown consequences. The protocols set at
that conference remain the standard for working with genetic manipulation and are still in use at the
National Institutes of Health.
Sustained use of protocols does not mean the ethical debates surrounding genetic modification
are closed. Ongoing, advancing technology has led to refined processes and has increased
accessibility and ease for making changes in genes. Ethical reflection must keep pace so that issues of
benefits and risks to the welfare of organisms and ecologies are properly addressed before and during
the applications of modification (3). These issues include who or what benefits from using GMOs,
how GMOs are regulated, how decisions about research on GMOs are made, and who makes those
decisions.
Many areas for genetic modification have since emerged. GMOs are being used to provide a
variety of new products and alter reactions that are greener. In medicine, altered bacteria produce
insulin, which means it does not have to be harvested from bovine sources. Changes to tobacco
plants promote syntheses of a variety of pharmaceutical chemicals. GMO enzymes improve the
atom economy of reactions for making Lipitor, which diminishes byproducts and waste. Other
organisms have been engineered to make biodegradable bioplastics. Genetically modified algae and
other plants now can produce biofuels. These are just a few examples of what GMO technology has
accomplished.

204
Orna et al.; Chemistry’s Role in Food Production and Sustainability: Past and Present
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2019.
 Genetic Modification of Food
Genetic engineering might make sense to provide better or more available medicines, such as
insulin, or to grow special bacteria that take in oil spills or spit out biopetrol. Why, though, mess with
our food? The answer is simple and rather obvious: to strengthen the life cycles and yields of our
food. That is, we need to help crops grow in sometimes austere conditions or be able to better battle
pests that consume them before they get to our plates. We are a population of 7 billion, likely growing
to 9 billion before mid-century. Food yields and security are certainly among the critical issues
in sustaining that many people. Enhancing the durability and yields of our food through genetic
modification is arguably a strategy to address the needs of this population size.
Scientists have worked on food modifications for a few decades. Flavr Savr tomatoes were the
first GMO to be approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. They became available in 1994
with slower ripening and enhanced flavor traits. They were marketed as premium produce, which
caused them to be economically unviable. They faded away, but their genes did make their way into
other tomato crops (4).
Papaya and rice were the next organisms to be genetically modified commercially. Creating a
GMO papaya plant that was resistant to the papaya ringspot virus helped successfully maintain the
viability of the crop. The modified papaya became resistant to the virus and the papaya plants could
thrive. By doing so, a critical economy for Hawaiian farmers was also saved (5).
Another example of modifying a food to address a need was Golden Rice. In impoverished
communities across the world, poor nutrition is real and deficiency in vitamin A can be high.
Industries genetically engineered rice to contain beta carotene, which humans use to synthesize
vitamin A in the body. The grain’s light yellow color, due to the presence of beta carotene, gave it the
name Golden Rice. According to a Time Magazine headline in 2000, “This Rice Could Save a Million
Kids a Year (6).” However, at the same time, the controversy about the long-term effects and impacts
of using GMOs grew. This controversy brought challenges and even protests to the widespread use of
Golden Rice.

The Great GMO Debate (7)

I have often told my students that chemistry is a human endeavor that lies in the tension between
harming and enhancing life. The technology used to genetically modify organisms does not escape
that claim. Inherent good or bad does not exist in scientific or technological discoveries. That
judgment ultimately comes with the human application and management of the technology. Most of
the scientific community, at least from an ethical standpoint, agrees that we, at minimum, should do
no harm with the applications of the technologies. Harm, though, is a difficult concept and comes
with many complex variables, especially when analyzing ecosystems and communities of organisms
that interact. There are usually consequences somewhere when changes are made. The question
remains: are these consequences damaging and, if so, who or what is damaged? That is not just
from the perspective of treatment of other human beings but also with respect to treatment of other
organisms, ecosystems, and resources on this planet. GMOs have now collided with this issue. One
concern is with respect to propagating resistance. Many GMOs have been engineered to be resistant
to virus attacks or herbicides. When nature interacts with plants (or GMOs) with these engineered
traits, these traits can be replicated and transferred to other organisms through reproduction cycles.
This means an engineered trait can be passed along and possibly across species. If so, the trait gets
propagated.

205
Orna et al.; Chemistry’s Role in Food Production and Sustainability: Past and Present
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2019.
 Our engineering does not stop nature’s pathways; rather, it engages with them. Even though we
engineer in a lab, organisms in nature still mutate, adapt, and reproduce. Thus, in the late 20th and
early 21st century, when organisms were discovered that were resistant to the herbicide glyphosate,
other concerns about using GMOs elevated. Continuing in the 21st century, larger issues arose
with the Bacillus thuringiensis toxin that had been engineered into cotton crops to ward off pests.
Caterpillars were discovered that were immune to the toxin, and the toxin itself had been discovered
in the blood of pregnant women and their fetuses. The debate about the utility and safety of GMOs
escalated to a roaring crescendo. As a result, GMOs take their place in the tension between harming
and enhancing life. Here are some other issues in the current debate.

Genetic Engineering Is Not Natural

Some people think that transgenic manipulation, the insertion of DNA pieces from a different
species into a plant’s DNA, interferes with nature and unduly alters its processes. Some further argue
that the transfer of genes in this way is beyond the role of humans in this world.
The introduction of foreign DNA into a plant’s genome actually mimics natural processes. In
fact, recent research discovered that bacteria—similar to those that genetic engineers use to modify
corn with the B. thuringiensis gene—inserted its own bacterial DNA into sweet potatoes in South
America at least 8000 years ago. The normal plant root became swollen with starch and was
integrated into the diet of early Native Americans. Now, several varieties of sweet potato exist
throughout the world, and it is the world’s seventh most important staple crop. It is the primary
source of calories for millions of people. The exchange of DNA across species is not a rare event and
most typically occurs in single-celled organisms such as bacteria. Gene transfer has also occurred
between millet and rice (8, 9).

GMOs Cause Health Problems Such as Allergies and Cancer

There is some concern that genetic engineering will introduce dangerous compounds, such as
allergens or toxins, into the food chain. Some of these compounds may be carcinogenic and could
lead to tumors in those who eat the GMO.
While it is possible for a new gene to express a protein that is an allergen or toxin, research
scientists work with food regulators and rigorously test their creations for toxicity. For example, in
1996, a company that was trying to insert a beneficial Brazil nut gene into soybeans halted the project
when it was discovered that the resulting soybeans also carried a nut allergen. While the majority of
testing data is treated as proprietary information by biotech companies and not released to the public,
thousands of published safety reports on GMOs have shown no evidence that the foods are more
dangerous than non-GMOs. Over 10 years of scientific research has yet to find significant hazards
directly connected to the use of GMOs (10, 11, 12). This, of course, does not mean that they do not
exist.

GMOs Cause Farmers To Over-Use Pesticides and Herbicides

GMO opponents often point out that farmers growing genetically engineered crops have
increased the amount of pesticides or herbicides used to protect their crops. One type of corn, for
example, is genetically engineered to be resistant to a type of herbicide called glyphosate. The use of
glyphosate has dramatically increased since the introduction of this type of corn.
Some types of crops have been developed that actually reduce reliance on pesticides. A case
in point is the B. thuringiensis corn described earlier in this chapter. The plant itself grows its own

206
Orna et al.; Chemistry’s Role in Food Production and Sustainability: Past and Present
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2019.
pesticide—one that is specific to insects and does not interact with the biology of other animals—in
levels much lower than that required to treat the outside surface of the plant. As for glyphosate, its
increased use has led to the decrease in use of other herbicides that are more toxic (13, 14). The
application of glyphosate typically calls for 360 mL/acre, or about a soda can’s worth of herbicide for
about 43,500 ft2. To put this in perspective, an American football field (excluding the end zones) is
48,000 ft2. If the plant is growing its own pesticide, no additional amount needs to be applied.

GMOs Create “Super Insects” and “Super Weeds”

In the ecosystem surrounding a genetically modified crop, the targeted weeds, bugs, or bacteria
must move, die, or evolve. If the species evolves, the genetically modified crop may have no resistance
to it. Historically, we solved the problem of the evolution of a pest by finding a natural trait within the
existing crop varieties and then using selective breeding to create a new, stronger hybrid. As we come
to depend on a narrower set of crop varieties, we no longer have the genetic variety for such selection.
Regulators in both the United States and the European Union require the cultivation of
traditional crops, without engineered toxins or resistance traits, alongside genetically modified
varieties. The mix is intended to prevent evolution of resistance in pests because resistance to the
crop will not be a survival requirement. Scientists may need to further test how much of the non-
engineered crop is enough to minimize the risk of newly resistant pests. As engineered crops become
more widespread, more research needs to be done with respect to their intended and unintended
impacts. Such research needs to be honest about biases which may exist and which questions may
remain unanswered (15). For more on the history of agriculture, please see Chapter 9 in this volume
by Sarkadi, “Effects of Fertilizer on Food Supply.”

Farmers Cannot Replant Genetically Modified Seeds

A claim has been made that some seed companies use what is called a “terminator gene” to
prevent GMO crop seeds from being able to be replanted.
There have been no crops developed that incorporate this technology. Seed companies often do,
however, require agreements that prevent farmers from replanting seeds gathered from a GMO crop,
ensuring future purchases of new seeds every year. Before the advent of genetic engineering, most
of the corn crops grown in the United States and the European Union were commercially developed
hybrids that led to a mixture of inferior corn variants with lower yields when replanted. Beginning in
the 1930s, seed companies began developing high-yield hybrid corn and by 1965, 95% of the corn
crops planted in the United States were hybrids requiring planting of newly purchased seeds to keep
yields high. Although this trend started with corn hybrids, farmers growing other crops also began to
repurchase new seeds rather than replant saved seeds. Today, even farmers not using GMOs prefer to
purchase new seeds every year to ensure higher yields in their harvests.
There are many arguments back and forth over the use and safety of GMOs. They have been put
forth as a way to increase crop yields but advocacy groups against GMOs claim they have failed to
do so (16). Because of the potential threat to human and environmental health as well as the concern
that GMOs reduce plant diversity, several European nations have banned GMOs altogether. Other
countries require foods with GMOs to be labeled accordingly so that consumers are informed of
what they are eating and what its sources are. The United States will also enforce such a requirement
beginning in 2020. Other advocacy groups that support the use of GMOs point to scientific
evidence. GMOs have not been shown to be harmful and unsafe to eat (17).

207
Orna et al.; Chemistry’s Role in Food Production and Sustainability: Past and Present
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2019.
 Valid claims are made on both sides, but these claims are also interwoven with advocacy, political
viewpoints, and the influence of business and industry (18). In this ongoing debate, as with any
application of scientific processes, astute study and ethical reasoning must continue to be jointly
employed when making decisions about the use of GMOs.

Hope: Addressing World Needs

The United Nations has set 17 Sustainable Development Goals to ensure the world remains
a viable place for all peoples, generations, and environments (19). At least six directly relate to
the growth, availability, and consumption of food. As our population climbs to 10 billion people,
the issue of how to feed us will not recede. Finding solutions is tantamount to our survival. The
intelligence, tools, and devices that have aided our evolution as a species cannot be ignored in the
quest to keep it on this planet. Our scientific and technological developments are necessary to find
these solutions.

Hunger and malnutrition affect every aspect of human development and persist for various reasons
including unequal access to land, to sufficient and nutritious food, and to other productive resources.
Adequate food production is necessary but insufficient to ensure national nutritional security. .
. So the challenge for agriculture is three-fold: to increase agricultural production, especially of
nutrient-rich foods, to do so in ways which reduce inequality, and to reverse and prevent resource
degradation. [Science and Technology] can play a vital role in meeting these challenges.
- Zareen Pervez Bharucha (20)

Although the debate rages on, the history of GMOs appears to continue as they remain likely
players in forging solutions to feeding this world. They alone are not the solution, but for now, they
appear to have a seat at the table. They are joined by others such as sustainable farming, agroecology
principles and practices, and innovations for farmers of small lands. The cautions and pauses
associated with the use of GMOs must continue to be considered. Together, we cannot lose sight
of the vision of our American Chemical Society: to improve people’s lives through the transforming
power of chemistry! GMOs, as debated as they as, are chemical tools we have for potentially
transforming food into a sustainable resource for this planet.

References
1. Rangel, G. From Corgis to Corn: A Brief Look at the Long History of GMO Technology, 2015.
Science in the News Blog, Harvard University Graduate School for the Arts and Sciences Web
site. http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/from-corgis-to-corn-a-brief-look-at-the-long-
history-of-gmo-technology/ (accessed Oct 26, 2018).
2. Berg, P.; Baltimore, D.; Brenner, S.; Roblin, R. O.; Singer, M. F. Summary Statement of
the Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA Molecules. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A
1975June.
3. Rodriguez, E. Ethical Issues in Genome Editing for Non-Human Organisms Using CRISPR/
Cas9 System. J. Clin. Res. Bioeth. 2017, 8, 300.
4. American Chemical Society. Chem. Eng. News 1999, 77, 27.
5. Smyth, S. How GM Papaya Saved Hawaii’s Papaya Industry, 2015. SAIFood Web site.
https://saifood.ca/gm-papaya/ (accessed Oct 26, 2018).
6. Nash, J. M. This Rice Could Save a Million Kids a Year. Time Magazine 2000July31.

208
Orna et al.; Chemistry’s Role in Food Production and Sustainability: Past and Present
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2019.
7. Much of the source material for this section comes from Fahlman, B., ed. (2017). Chemistry in
Context, 9th edition. American Chemical Society.
8. Diao, X.; Freeling, M.; Lisch, D. Horizontal Transfer of a Plant Transposon. PLoS Biol. 2005,
4, e5.
9. Kyndt, T.; Quispe, D.; Zhai, H.; Jarret, R.; Ghislain, M.; Liu, Q.; Gheysen, G.; Kreuze, J.
F. Sweet Potato: A Naturally Transgenic Food Crop. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2015, 112,
5844–5849.
10. Goodman, R. E.; Vieths, S.; Sampson, H. A.; Hill, D.; Ebisawa, M.; Taylor, S. L.; van Ree, R.
Allergenicity Assessment of Genetically Modified Crops—What Makes Sense? Nat. Biotechnol.
2008, 26, 73–81.
11. Lehrer, S. B.; Bannon, G. A. Risks of Allergic Reactions to Biotech Proteins in Foods:
Perception and Reality. Allergy 2005, 60, 559–564.
12. Nicolia, A.; Manzo, A.; Veronesi, F.; Rosellini, D. An Overview of the Last 10 Years of
Genetically Engineered Crop Safety Research. Crit. Rev. Biotech. 2014, 32.
13. Benbrook, C. M. Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use in the U.S.—the
first sixteen years. Environ. Sci. Eur. 2012.
14. Ferrell, J. A.; Witt, W. W. Comparison of Glyphosate with Other Herbicides for Weed Control
in Corn (Zea mays): Efficacy and Economics. Weed Technol. 2002, 16, 701–706.
15. Bakhsh, A.; Khabbazi, S. D.; Baloch, F. S.; Demirel, U.; Caliskan, M. E; Hatipoglu, R.; Ozcan,
S.; Ozcan, H. Insect-Resistant Transgenic Crops: Retrospect and Challenges. Turk J. Agric. For.
2015, 39, 531–548.
16. Gurian-Sherman, D. Failure to Yield: Evaluating the Performance of Genetically Engineered Crops;
Union of Concerned Scientists: Cambridge, MA, April 2009. https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/
default/files/legacy/assets/documents/foodandagriculture/failure-to-yield.pdf (accessed Dec
5, 2018).
17. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Genetically Engineered Crops:
Experiences and Prospects. The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2016.
18. Zhang, C.; Wohlhueter, R.; Zhang, H. Genetically Modified Foods: A Critical Review of Their
Promise and Problems. Food Science and Human Wellness 2016, 5, 116–123.
19. United Natons. Sustainable Development Goals. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/
sustainable-development-goals/ (accessed Oct 15, 2018).
20. Bharucha, Z. P. Sustainable Food Production: Past and Present, 2013. SciDiv.net. https://www.
scidev.net/global/food-security/feature/sustainable-food-production-facts-and-figures.html
(accessed Dec 5, 2018).

209
Orna et al.; Chemistry’s Role in Food Production and Sustainability: Past and Present
ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2019.