|
GMOs and food safety: questions and answers
How could the genetic engineering of a food crop affect human health?
Current understanding of the way in which genes are regulated is extremely limited, and the process of genetic engineering has side effects that are impossible to predict or control. The new gene could, for example, alter chemical reactions within the cell or disturb cell functions. This could lead to instability, the creation of new toxins or allergens, and changes in nutritional value.
Isn’t genetically engineered food thoroughly safety tested?
No. There is no long-term safety testing of genetically engineered food. Short-term animal feeding trials are conducted in some cases. The research is done by the biotech companies themselves. No evidence from human trials for either toxicity or allergy testing is required. No independent checks of the company’s claims are required.
But no one has fallen over dead
from eating genetically engineered
food have they?
We don’t know. Proponents of genetic engineering often make comments such as: "We’ve been eating genetically engineered food for years in the United States and there have been no problems, not even a sniffle". Well – how on earth would we know? Without any scientific studies, without any epidemiological testing being done (e.g. following people who’ve eaten genetically engineered food over years, comparing them with a control group of people who have not eaten GE food, taking blood samples etc) how on earth would we know if people are being affected? Many scientists feel that we would need to study the cumulative effects of eating genetically engineered food over years to know if we are being affected.
The British Medical Association states: "Antibiotic resistance, the threat of new allergic reactions and the unknown hazards of transgenic DNA mean that on health grounds alone the impact of GMO’s must be fully assessed before they are released. The environmental implications and the long term effects on human health cannot be safely predicted at this stage and caution must therefore prevail."
Professor Joe Cummins, professor emeritus of genetics at the University of Western Ontario: "The failure to test may provide some protection in the courts against lawsuits by those maimed or crippled by the foods. Most ill effects from food and allergies are not easily quantified until after the disaster. At best, there may be a small but marked increase in autoimmune disease and allergy associated with the foods. At worst, major outbreaks of illness could be observed and will be difficult to trace to the unlabelled foods."
Hasn’t the FDA said that genetically engineered foods are safe?
In 1992, the US Food and Drug Administration published a policy statement on genetically engineered foods, which stated that it "is not aware of any information showing that foods derived by these new methods differ from other foods in any meaningful or uniform way."
It determined, therefore, that most of the foods produced by genetic engineering should be regarded and regulated as if they were foods produced by traditional methods. This means that, except in certain cases, such as when there are major changes in nutrient composition or incorporation of specific proteins known to cause allergic reactions, genetically engineered foods in the US do not require a pre-market approval process, public notification, or labeling. The industry decides when and whether to consult with the FDA, and it is they who conduct safety tests for their own products, notifying the FDA only if they suspect a problem. Thus it is the very companies who stand to profit who decide whether or not these products are hazardous.
It has become clear, however, as a result of thousands of pages of internal documents that were released during a lawsuit filed by a number of public interest groups against the FDA, that this policy is in fact inconsistent with the views of many of the FDA's own scientists.
FDA microbiologist Dr. Louis Pribyl, for example, stated: "There is a profound difference between the types of unexpected effects from traditional breeding and genetic engineering ...." Similarly, Dr. E.J. Matthews of the FDA's Toxicology Group warned that ". . . genetically modified plants could ... contain unexpected high concentrations of plant toxicants...," and cautioned that some of these toxicants could be unexpected and could "...be uniquely different chemicals that are usually expressed in unrelated plants."
The numerous internal critiques of the proposed policy were summed up by Dr. Linda Kahl, FDA compliance officer, who protested that the agency was "... trying to fit a square peg into a round hole ... [by] trying to force an ultimate conclusion that there is no difference between foods modified by genetic engineering and foods modified by traditional breeding practices."
"The processes of genetic engineering and traditional breeding are different," she declared, "and according to the technical experts in the agency, they lead to different risks."
Dr Suzanne Wuerthele, US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) toxicologist:
"This technology is being promoted, in the face of concerns by respectable scientists and in the face of data to the contrary, by the very agencies which are supposed to be protecting human health and the environment. The bottom line in my view is that we are confronted with the most powerful technology the world has ever known, and it is being rapidly deployed with almost no thought whatsoever to its consequences."
What are the GMO foods
on the market in the US?
The following genetically engineered plants are approved for sale in the US: herbicide-resistant canola, radicchio, corn, cotton, and soybeans; insect-resistant corn, cotton and potatoes; virus-resistant papaya, potato and squash; canola designed to produce high concentrations of lauric acid; and tomatoes engineered to delay their ripening, or have thicker skins.
The most common genetically engineered crops are corn, soybeans, cotton and canola. There is also a genetically engineered hormone, BGH, which is commonly injected into dairy cows in the United States.
|
|
the clock is ticking ...
The most common genetically engineered crops are corn, soybeans, cotton and canola. There is also a genetically engineered hormone, BGH, which is commonly injected into dairy cows in the United States.
... Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible...
Phil Angell,
Director of Corporate Communications at Monsanto
|
... The bottom line in my view is that we are confronted with the most powerful technology the world has ever known, and it is being rapidly deployed with almost no thought whatsoever to its consequences ...
Dr. Linda Kahl, FDA compliance officer
|
|
