Research:

 A GMO (genetically modified organism) is a plant, animal, or microorganism that

has had its genetic material (DNA) changed using technology that generally
involves the specific modification of DNA, including the transfer of specific DNA
from one organism to another. Scientists often refer to this process as genetic
engineering.

 GMO crops are not changed in ways that would increase the risk of cancer for the
humans or animals that eat them. An analysis of data3 by the National Academies
of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine found that patterns of change in cancer
rates in the United States are similar to Europe and the United Kingdom, where
people eat less GMO foods. Cancer rates are not connected with eating GMOs.

Source: https://www.fda.gov/media/135280/download#:~:text=Do%20GMOs%20affect
%20your%20health,oils%20that%20contain%20trans%20fats.

 GMOs are relatively new and, like anything new, there are conflicting viewpoints
about many issues surrounding the use of these plants. One area that draws a lot of
attention is whether these GMO plants and the foods that contain them are safe to
eat. There is no data to indicate that consumption of GMOs is bad for human health.
 As GMOs stand today, there are no health benefits to eating them over non-GMO
foods.
Source: https://ag.purdue.edu/gmos/gmos-health.html

 One example is an anti-GMO advocacy group called the Institute for

Responsible Technology (IRT), which reported that rats fed a diet containing a
GMO potato had virtually every organ system adversely affected after just ten
days of feeding
Source: https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/will-gmos-hurt-my-body/

 Scientists create GMO foods by introducing genetic material, or DNA, from a

different organism through genetic engineering.
 Most of the currently available GMO foods are plants, such as fruit and
vegetables.
 Genetically engineering foods is a relatively new practice, which means the
long-term effects on safety are not yet clear.
 The World Health Organization (WHO)Trusted Source discourages genetic
engineers from using DNA from allergens unless they can prove that the gene
itself does not cause the problem.

Environmental concerns includeTrusted Source:

  the risk of outcrossing, where genes from GMO foods pass into wild plants and
other crops

 a negative impact on insects and other species

 reduction in other plant types, leading to a loss of biodiversity

source: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/what-is-gmo

 Animal toxicity studies with certain GM foods have shown that they may toxically
affect several organs and systems.
 The results of most studies with GM foods indicate that they may cause some
common toxic effects such as hepatic, pancreatic, renal, or reproductive effects and
may alter the hematological, biochemical, and immunologic parameters.
Souce: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18989835/ (National Library of Medicine,
An official website of the United States government)

May use for other POV:

 Some genetically engineered crops reduce the need for applying synthetic chemical
pesticides to kill insects that can damage crops. This can be good for farm workers
by lowering their exposure to harmful chemicals.

Sources: https://www.nationalacademies.org/based-on-science/foods-made-with-gmos-
do-not-pose-special-health-risks

Consequences of GMOs for biodiversity

 Genetic modification produces genetically modified animals, plants and organisms.

If they are introduced into the environment they can affect biodiversity. For
example, existing species can be overrun by more dominant new species.
  These and other potential effects are considered during the licensing procedure.
(Such effects can of course also occur following the introduction of non-genetically
modified animals plants and organisms.)

 Assessing the impact on biodiversity requires knowledge. This knowledge must be

constantly updated so the State can assess the effects of future GMOs on
biodiversity. A major ecological research programme, ERGO, aimed to amass
ecological knowledge, for example, on the impact of new GMOs on their
environment. This research was coordinated by the Netherlands Organisation for
Scientific Research (NWO).

Source:https://www.government.nl/topics/biotechnology/consequences-of-gmos-
for-biodiversity (Government of the Netherlands)

Concerns that farmers should address before adopting the technology include the private
contractual relations between farmers and seed companies, the environmental impacts of
the technology, and the potential impacts of consumer concerns (both domestic and
international) on the market for GM products:

 Limited rights to retain and reuse seed Under a private contract between a grower
and a biotech company, the grower's rights to the purchased seed are significantly
limited. Such contracts generally contain a "no saved seed" provision.17 This
provision prohibits growers from saving seed and/or reusing seed from GM
crops.18 In effect, the provision requires growers of GM crops to make an annual
purchase of GM seeds.
 Acceptance of limited liability Contracts between seed companies and farmers
sometimes contain a clause that limits the "liability of [the seed company] to or any
seller for any and all losses, injury or damages resulting from the use or handling of
a product containing [the seed company's] gene technology shall be the price paid
by the grower for the quantity of such product involved, or at the election of [the
seed company] or any seller, the replacement of such quantity. In no event shall [the
seed company] or any seller be liable for any incidental, consequential, special or
punitive damages."23 Under such a clause, if the use of GM seed has a negative
impact on another aspect of the farmer's operations, this clause precludes the farmer
from recovering any damages from the company in the event the use of the product
causes harm.

Environmental Concerns:
  Potential cross-pollination of GM seeds onto non-GM crops is also a concern to
farmers, particularly those farmers that certify their crops as non-GM crops or
organic crops. There is evidence that such crosspollination is already occurring.27
Plants with GM characteristics have been found in conventional crops as well as in
crops that have been grown using only organic farming practices.28 Tests
performed by Successful Farming magazine found evidence of cross-pollination in
both corn and soybean crops.
 Critics say that the effects of GM products on human health are not yet fully known.
The largest threat to health is the presence of unknown allergens in the GM food
supply. There is some evidence that humans who respond to allergens will respond
similarly to that allergen when it is transferred to another organism. For example, a
recent study found that people allergic to nuts reacted to GM soybeans into which a
protein from a Brazil nut had been inserted.

Source: https://pennstatelaw.psu.edu/_file/aglaw/Impacts_of_Genetically_Modified.pdf

 GM seeds are produced primarily by only a few large companies who own the
intellectual property for the genetic variations. A transition to GM crops would
closely align global food production with the activities of a few key companies.
From an economic standpoint, that poses a risk to long-term food security by
creating the potential for a single-point failure. If that company failed, then the crop
it provides would not be available to the people who depend on that crop.
 unintended effects on biogeochemistry, especially through impacts on soil microbial
populations that regulate the flow of nitrogen, phosphorus and other essential
elements;
 the transfer of inserted genetic material to other domesticated or native populations,
generally known as gene flow, through pollination, mixed matings, dispersal or
microbial transfer.

 1. The repeated use of one herbicide causes a shift in the weed flora because there is
very high selection pressure on weeds to evolve biotypes that are resistant to the
herbicides associated with transgenic plants bred to be tolerant of those herbicides.
 Gene flow occurs with the spread of genes through pollen and outcrossing from
herbicide-resistant crops to related weed species. In the absence of the particular
herbicide, the possession of this trait is unlikely to improve the strength of the
weeds but, when the herbicide is applied, it would improve the weeds' strength and
could reduce the economic benefits of herbicide resistance.

Source: https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/are-genetically-modified-crops-
answer-world-hunger

 Nineteen out of the 27 member state countries of the European Union have voted to
either partially or fully ban Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). This comes
after the European Commission called for each EU nation to vote if they wanted to
 opt out of having to grow GMO crops even if they were allowed to do so within the
boundaries of the EU.
 Several countries such as France, Germany, Austria, Greece, Hungary, the
Netherlands, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Bulgaria, Poland, Denmark, Malta,
Slovenia, Italy and Croatia have chosen a total ban.
 Environmental activist groups, for instance, Greenpeace have been protesting
strongly against GMOs for some time. This is due to fears that GMOs have the
potential to cause harm to human and animal health and ecosystems, as well as a
dramatic reduction in plant diversity. In addition, it is very difficult to stop the
spread of GMO crops as they can easily transfer to areas where natural crops are
growing through means like wind and insect pollination.
Source: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/europeangreencapital/countriesruleoutgmos/

 Industrial-style agriculture focuses on standardized processes, efficiency and

resource extraction. It was already in place by the time GMO crops came on the
scene. The practice of “monocropping” — cultivating a single crop, year after
year, on the same land — might seem efficient, but it ultimately decreases both
biodiversity and soil health.
Source: https://livingnongmo.org/2021/04/13/how-do-gmos-affect-biodiversity/

 In official government jargon, this mixing is referred to as

“adventitious presence,” but what it means is that GMO
crops can contaminate non-GMO and organic crops through
cross-pollination on the field or through seed or grain mixing after harvest.2
Not only does GMO contamination affect
seed purity, but it also has serious ramifications for organic
and non-GMO farmers that face economic harm due to lost
markets or decreased crop values.

 Farmers who intentionally grow GMO crops are not required to plant non-GMO
buffer zones to prevent contamination unless this is stipulated in the farm’s
permit from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).7 Yet even the use of
buffer zones has proven ineffective because these areas are usually not large
enough to prevent contamination
 A Food & Water Watch and Organic Farmers Agency for Relationship
Marketing (OFARM) survey of organic farmers found one-third of responding
farmers had dealt with GMO contamination on their farm, and the majority of
farmers, five out of six, were concerned about GMO contamination. Farmers
reported additional costs to their operation from efforts to prevent contamination
that are outside their organic certification duties, including delayed planting,
more frequent equipment cleaning, buying more expensive seeds and testing
their seeds.
 GMO contamination of non-GMO and organic fields is a growing problem in
the United States that will only intensify with the approval of more GMO crops.
To help preserve diverse agricultural production methods, biotechnology
companies that patent GMO seeds should take responsibility for any financial
 harm that the presence of their patented technology inflicts upon non-GMO and
organic farmers.
Source:
https://foodandwaterwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/gmo_crops_hurt_farme
rs_fs_jan_2015.pdf

 Since the commercial introduction of GMOs, the seed industry has rapidly
consolidated. Today, just four companies control almost 60% of the seed market.
For certain crops, the market is even more concentrated. The “big four” seed
companies – Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta and Dow – own 80% of the corn and
70% of the soybean market.
 This concentration has made a huge dent in farmers’ pockets. USDA data show that
the per-acre cost of soybean and corn seed spiked dramatically between 1995 and
2014, by 351% and 321%, respectively.[1] Those costs far outpaced the market price
farmers received for corn and soy, leaving them tighter margins on which to run
their farms.
 GMO contamination is well documented. According to the International Journal of
Food Contamination, almost 400 cases of GMO contamination occurred between
1997 and 2013 in 63 countries. Part of the problem is the very nature of nature.
Many plants are pollinated by insects, birds or wind, allowing pollen from a GMO
plant to move to neighboring fields or into the wild. This “genetic drift” illustrates
the enormous difficulty in containing GMO technology. Not only is genetic drift
impossible to prevent, inadequate regulation also fails to hold seed companies
accountable for any resulting damages and ultimately puts the onus on farmers who
have been the victims of contamination.
 For farmers, the consequences have been severe. Contamination can spark dramatic
economic losses for farmers who face rejection from export markets that ban
GMOs. Organic farmers suffering contamination can lose their organic certification
and the premium they earn for their organic crop.
Sources: https://www.farmaid.org/issues/gmos/gmos-top-5-concerns-for-family-
farmers/

 Since Monsanto began selling their patented 'Roundup Ready' genetically

modified (GM) seeds they have sued hundreds of farmers for patent
infringement. Their heavy-handed investigations and ruthless prosecutions have
been nothing less than an assault on the foundations of farming practices and
traditions that have endured for millennia, including one of the oldest, the right
to save and replant crop seed. Michael White, a fourth generation farmer and
seed cleaner living in the northeast corner of rural Alabama never imagined that
he would become the target of the conglomerates aggressive legal tactics. But
unlike other farmers in his area Michael refused to give in to Monsanto and in
doing so became one of only a handful of farmers to maintain the ability to
speak publicly about his case.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwLy9q7Eoj4&t=162s
• Colombia is one of the countries with the greatest biodiversity in the world, a vital

ecosystem that is threatened due to the increasing invasion of transgenic crops.

 Colombia, for example, is an important center of origin and diversity of native

and Creole maize in the world, with more than 30 different races. Ethnic and

peasant communities have preserved hundreds of Creole varieties in their

territories, which are the foundation of their culture, their traditional production

systems and their food sovereignty. For these communities, transgenic maize

represents the risk of losing their native varieties, due to being contaminated by

genetically modified (GM) maize. There is evidence of the contamination

caused by these GM corns and the competent Biosafety authorities -such as the

ICA- have not taken the necessary measures to prevent said contamination.

 The proposal that Colombia be a Transgenic Free Territory aims to guarantee

food sovereignty, the health of its population and the conservation of all the

wealth of biodiversity that exists in our territory.

Source: https://www.slowfood.com/es/la-lucha-de-colombia-por-disminuir-la-
cultivacion-de-transgenicos-y-proteger-su-biodiversidad/