Genetically Modified Foods and Their Socio-Economic Detriments

Tiffany Ah Tye

3/20/2014

Genetically Modified Foods

Genetically Modified Foods and their Socio-Economic Detriments

In light of the rather recent amazing technological advances, it’s no wonder

the 21st century has been named the start of the technological age. Every day,

brilliant new concepts are thought up for machinery and technology that will aid us

in day-to-day life – we have been able to cure more diseases and ailments in the last

decade than ever. There’s no doubt – the technological advances that we have made

have helped us greatly in surviving as a race. But in some cases, technology may

have gone too far. One case of this is the debate on Genetically Modified Organisms,

or GMOs. Ever since GMOs were introduced to society, there has been much debate

on whether or not GMO produce (and other food that contains GMO produce)

should be labeled or not. There have been no conclusive long-term tests of GMO

foods, so it is unknown whether or not they are harmful to the human body –

however, there have been indications that it is indeed risky to be eating these foods.

Genetically Modified Foods have begun to shown their effects on the human food

chain, and it’s not necessarily pretty. Genetically Modified Organisms have already

harmed the environment in many ways, and will continue to show negative effects

unless we stop genetically engineering food. GMO foods are detrimental to our

society and economy because of their health risks to humans, their negative effect

on the economy, and their effect on the food chain.

As mentioned above, the long-term effects of Genetically Modified Organisms

on the human body are unknown. However, The American Academy of

Environmental Medicine (AAEM) encourages doctors to warn their patients against

GMO foods because “GM foods pose a serious health risk in the areas of toxicology,

1

Genetically Modified Foods

allergy and immune function, reproductive health, and metabolic, physiologic and

genetic health and are without benefit” (Dean and Armstrong). One of the main

problems of GM foods is that they contain allergens in them that would not normally

be in that type of food. In an article on Forbes, it was stated, “All GM crops are tested

against a database of all known allergens before commercialization and any crop

found containing new allergens is not approved or marketed.” (Entine and Wendel)

There are many articles that specifically address GM foods and their relations to

allergies; however, this quote by Entine and Wendel specifies that the GM crops are

tested for allergens in general, but not for specific allergens that should not be in

that crop. While it is great that GM crops are tested for allergens that aren’t already

in foods, they should also be tested for allergens that aren’t natural to that food. If

GM corn, for example, had one of the allergens that were in soy, then anyone allergic

to soy would then be allergic to GM corn as well – but without knowing it. In a recent

study by Iowa State University, it was hypothesized that the genetically modified

antibiotic markers in the GM food may be the cause of “decreas[ed] effectiveness of

antibiotics against diseases in humans” (Wells, Rasmussen, Ohde, Malual, and

Jarchow, p. 5). In spite of these theories and studies, though, GMO companies such as

Monsanto are still firmly arguing that there has been no proof that GMOs are

actually harmful to the human body. Yet, the AAEM explains that “several animal

studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food consumption including

infertility, immune dysregulation, accelerated aging, dysregulation of genes

associated with cholesterol synthesis, insulin regulation, cell signaling, and protein

formation, and changes in the liver, kidney, spleen and gastrointestinal system”

2

Genetically Modified Foods

(Dean and Armstrong). GMO supporters, however, refuse to acknowledge that these

facts aren’t publicized as they should be, and continue to hide this information away

so that the general public is kept in the dark.

GM supporters often reason that the benefits of GM crops far outweigh the

potential dangers. After all, they claim that GM crops are the “food of the future” and

that they are possibly the solution to world hunger. However, while this may be

true, they often overlook the fact that because we don’t actually know the extent of

the potential dangers, they could in fact end up outweighing the benefits. For

example, if GM foods truly do cause all of these health problems in humans as they

do in animals, they wouldn’t be helping the population so much as killing it off. If

these health warnings are found to be true, by the time that it’s discovered it may

already be too late to return to having crops full of completely “natural” food. In fact,

nearly 88 percent of corn in America is GMO; and that’s mainly because GM corn

seeds get caught in the wind and blow over to other “natural” corn farms,

contaminating those farms and cross breeding with the “natural” corn.

Recently, one of the larger debates on GM foods has been whether or not GM

foods should be labeled as such. As of now, there are some states that require GM

foods to be labeled. However, there are others, such as Washington, in which the bill

to label GMO foods did not pass – and this is mostly due to indoctrination by GM

companies. Companies that use GMO produce in their products do their best to

argue against GM food labeling because it may deter some from buying their

products. In the state of Washington, Monsanto pumped 4.6 million dollars into ads

3

Genetically Modified Foods

campaigning against the bill that would require GMO labeling (Ryan, 2013). These

companies are afraid that the truth about GMO products will finally be available to

the public eye – the truth that while GMOs are currently untested and therefor

‘harmless’, there have been more and more experiments that have shown that GMO

foods do more harm than good.

GM crops are advertised by its supporters as being great because they are

resistant to the growth of weeds, and other parasites. This means that there would

be more crop yield from the crops, as they don’t lose as much to parasites.

Unfortunately, it has been found that because of this, and because we end up eating

these GM crops, we’ve become more resistant to viruses and infections. While this

usually wouldn’t be a bad thing, it hasn’t made us resistant enough to the point of

being completely immune – and because of this, viruses are getting stronger than

the antibiotics that we are taking for them. Basically, medicine cant keep up with the

resistance of the viruses, thus making each virus more dangerous as it develops.

Thenaturalrevolution.org states that Americans are ill informed about GM crops and

their disadvantages, as mainstream media has failed to report on the health

detriments of GM crops. They stated, “The only human GM feeding study ever

published shows that the foreign genes inserted into GM food crops can transfer

into the DNA of our gut bacteria.” (Smith) This is especially concerning because, as

the website states, this is a literal translation of the statement “you are what you

eat.” Basically, GM crops are slowly changing us from the inside as we eat them, and

most people are completely oblivious to this fact. If there were truly nothing to be

afraid of from GM foods, then the companies that use GMO products wouldn’t be

4

Genetically Modified Foods

pressing so hard to leave it off the labels.

Another major contention point in the debate about GMOs is the economic

factor. While this was supposed to be GMOs biggest selling point, it has fallen flat.

The promised economic gains of growing and producing GM products have not

shown themselves yet, and do not look like they will show themselves any time

soon. In the 2009 Fact Sheet from the Institute for Responsible Technology, it was

revealed that prices had risen steeply for GMO crops such as soybeans and corn

from the years 2006-2008. This opposes what GMO companies originally stated

would happen; they said that prices would fall, because the crops would be more

resistant to disease and rot. This has obviously not happened yet. Farmers with

GMO crops are struggling to make money because the price of Monsanto’s seeds are

so high. However, as Monsanto is one of the largest GMO crop producers in the

world, many farmers feel that they have no choice but to go along with the new flow.

Monsanto is slowly weeding out the farmers that haven’t switched over to

their GMO crops, especially for crops such as wheat, soybeans, and corn. One of the

largest problems for these farmers is that if a crop next to theirs, or even miles away

is growing GMO crops, then the GMO seedlings can be caught up in the wind and

carried to the non-GMO farm. In a news article from the Huffington Post, it was

stated, “Monsanto [has] filed 144 patent-infringement lawsuits against farmers

between 1997 and April 2010, and won judgments against farmers it said made use

of its seed without paying required royalties.” (Gillam) This is extremely

unfortunate, because how the lawsuit works is that once the farmers lose, they are

5

Genetically Modified Foods

instantly required to pay back all royalties that they would have had to pay over the

years. This is usually impossible for farmers, as most of the farms that Monsanto

sues are small and family-owned – and when the farmers can’t pay, Monsanto

simply takes their crops as collateral.

GM crops are often advertised as being the “next big thing”; GMO companies

have touted GM crops, often stating that in the future, GMO crops could end up

bringing world hunger to an end because they will be cheaper, and easier to grow

because they don’t need to be tended to as much, and would be stronger and more

robust. As mentioned above, from an economic standpoint, GM crops don’t hold

much merit right now. Also, “Internationally, many countries – in particular the

European Union – have expressed a reluctance to accept GM food and feed grains, in

contrast to the quick adoption of GM agriculture by US farmers.” (Quaim and Janvry)

If foreign nations refuse to buy GM crops and food, how is it supposed to help them?

Furthermore, “Developing countries often have very different climates, soils, and

agricultural practices than the locations in which GM crops were originally

developed, and some people question whether GM crops could actually be profitable

for third world agriculture.” (Quaim and Janvry) There are also concerns about GM

crops in the fact that some have been developed to be “terminator crops” – the seeds

from terminator crops can only be used once, and seeds cannot be sown from the

harvest, causing them to have to be bought again and again. This doesn’t seem

beneficial to the economy – in fact, it doesn’t seem anything but harmful. As stated

in “Genetic Modified Foods: Advantages and Disadvantages”, “This would be

financially disastrous for farmers in third world countries who cannot afford to buy

6

Genetically Modified Foods

seed each year and traditionally set aside a portion of their harvest to plant in the

next growing season.” (Mogilna and Mugafwa, 1)

Perhaps one of the largest fears about GM crops, though, is that we will

eventually become completely dependent on them. Already from the lawsuits that

Monsanto has filed, it has become clear that farmers of natural seeds can do nothing

to stop GM seeds from creeping into their fields and taking over with their

genetically superior models. This is a major problem, because soon there will be no

“natural” food anymore – if this continues, everything will have to be GM. Even

crops that aren’t GM are affected by this deadly transition; because the other GM

crops are so resistant to weeds and insects, the weeds and insects that attack crops

are becoming stronger by process of natural selection, and they find it easier to prey

on the non-GM crops. This complete takeover is potentially deadly, as GMOs have

not been studied in depth; if there were any long-term effects, it would already be

too late to go back by the time that we found out about them. In an article by the

International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA), it was

stated, “A major environmental concern associated with GM crops is their potential

to create new weeds through outcrossing with wild relatives, or simply by

persisting in the wild themselves.” By becoming dependent on GM crops, we are

effectively taking over nature, and halting the process of natural evolution. This

process, if adopted by other countries, would help us to exceed our carrying

capacity, which is not necessarily a good thing.

As mentioned before, 88 percent of our corn crops in America are GMO, and

93 percent of soybeans are GM as well - those numbers are steadily rising, too. Corn

7

Genetically Modified Foods

and soybeans are some of the most essential crops in the world; almost everything

has corn in it nowadays, and there are many soy products as well. Because corn is so

abundant, it is now feed for most animals. This is a huge problem; it is totally

unnatural for cows and chickens to eat corn. It’s even more of a problem that cows

eat corn, though. Cows have a natural diet of grass – and they’re one of the few

creatures that can actually eat it. In fact, if cows were allowed to eat grass, they

would almost be self-sustaining; they eat grass, and then their manure in turn

fertilizes the grass so that it can grow again to be eaten. Unfortunately, nowadays

the price of true “grass-fed beef” is so high that it has been reserved for the elites of

society. Corn-fed beef, not that it’s advertised as such on the package, is much

cheaper, so that is what most of America continues to buy, not realizing the

potential hazards. Supporters of the GM movement may say that feeding cows corn

is the solution to our no-land problem; as of now, we do not have enough land to

allow all cows to be grass-fed. Corn solves that problem because the cows can now

be kept in pens. It also allows them to fatten up quicker, as well as decreasing their

lifespan. In an interview with Michael Pollan, he says, “We're taking cows that we

used to let grow to be four or five years old before we eat them [and] we've got it

down to 14 months, and we're heading toward 11 months.”

Pollan, who is a professor of journalism at the UC Berkeley graduate school of

Journalism, is also an expert on GM crops and their detrimental effects on our food

chain. In his interview about their negative effects on cows, he says that corn is not a

cow’s natural diet. He says, “Corn is just too rich, too starchy. So as soon as you

introduce corn, the animal is liable to get sick.” This then means that as soon as the

8

Genetically Modified Foods

cows start on their diet of corn, farmers end up pumping them full of antibiotics. The

problem with this is the same as above with the GM crops. They are pumped full of

antibiotics, and when we eat their meat, we in turn are unknowingly digesting those

antibiotics as well, causing viruses to become even stronger without the medical

world even knowing it.

Some say that GM crops are furthering our technological future. In fact, there

was a new type of tomato that was recently produced that is purple, and has the

nutrition of a blueberry. However, one of the larger questions to counteract this is,

“Are we really doing the right thing? Should we be taking the course of nature into

our own hands?” While these GM crops may eventually go on to feed the hungry, it is

still not going to solve world hunger. In fact, if our world worked differently, world

hunger would already be solved. Today there is enough food in circulation to feed

everyone in this world. However, it is simply the distribution of the food that causes

problems. Third world countries don’t have as much food because they don’t have

enough money; so far, GM crops have yet to show that they can fix this problem. If

anything, they would make it worse with the “suicide gene” that they introduce to

many of their crops which forces farmers to keep buying seeds instead of sowing

them from their last harvest. Therefore, from an economic standpoint GM crops

would most likely not change the fact that people are going hungry in third world

countries. From a social standpoint, GM crops aren’t amazing either; because of the

risk of unknown health problems that they can cause, GM foods aren’t a completely

stable alternative for our food chain to fall back on. Also, if GM foods are truly the

route of our future, our future may look bleak indeed. The animals that we eat will

9

Genetically Modified Foods

be cooped up inside of pens and eating food that is unnatural to their natural diet;

crops will no longer be genetically diverse, but instead engineered to look and taste

completely the same. If GM crops continue to persevere in their search to take over

the future of food, our world may never be the same.

Annotated Bibliography

10

Genetically Modified Foods

Dean, A., & Armstrong, J. (2008, May 8). Genetically Modified Foods. Position Paper::

The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM). Retrieved March

17, 2014, from http://www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html

Background: This source gave me background information on why Genetically

Modified Foods may be bad. I mostly used this source for reasons on why it would

be bad for my health because it’s from a fairly reputable website on medicine.

Entine, J., & Wendel, J. (2013, October 14). 2000+ reasons why GMOs are safe to eat

and environmentally sustainable. Forbes. Retrieved March 18, 2014, from

www.Forbes.com

Instancing: I used this article when I was counter arguing the fact that GM foods

were tested for allergens. This was useful to me because the article skirted around

the fact that GM crops weren’t necessarily tested for specific allergens, just new

allergens in general.

Gillam, C. (2013, June 10). Monsanto wins lawsuit filed by U.S. organic farmers

worried about seed contamination. The Huffington Post. Retrieved March 21,

2014, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/10/monsanto-wins-

lawsuit_n_3417081.html

Background: I used this source to provide a quote that gave background information

as to the number of lawsuits that Monsanto won against farms who didn’t pay for

their seeds.

GM crops and the environment. (2012, July). GM Crops and the Environment.

11

Genetically Modified Foods

Retrieved March 13, 2014, from

http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/pocketk/4/

Argument: I used this source to back up my argument about the detriments of

accidental cross-contamination that could happen with GMOs. This article was

helpful because it came from a reputable source, and thus ensured that my

argument was valid.

Janvry, A., & Quaim, M. (2003, July 24). The Economy: Who makes the money. The

Economy: Who Makes the Money. Retrieved March 21, 2014, from

http://www.scienceandsociety.emory.edu/GMO/Economics.ht_

Argument: I used this article to argue that GMO crops aren’t really helping the

economy. It helped by providing the specific fact that European countries didn’t

want to deal with GMOs.

Mogilna, N., & Magufwa, A. (2009, December 4). Genetically modified foods

advantages and disadvantages. SUMDU. Retrieved March 20, 2014 from

http://essuir.sumdu.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/7916/1/14.pdf

Argument: I used this article to argue that GM crops are not, in fact, as good for the

economy as they are advertised to be. I used it to reject the thought that GM crops

would be helpful in solving the problem of hunger in third world hunger.

Pollan, M. (n.d.). Interview Michael Pollan. PBS. Retrieved March 21, 2014, from

12

Genetically Modified Foods

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/meat/interviews/pollan

.html

Argument: I used this article as a support to my argument on why it’s bad for cows

to eat corn instead of grass like they should. Pollan is a well-known, reputable

academic who specializes in writing about the environment and food. He was also

featured in the video “Food Inc” which is well known for talking about GMOs.

Rasmussen, B., Jarchow, M., Ohde, N., Malual, J., & Wells, B. (n.d.). The debate on

labeling Genetically Modified food. Retrieved March 20, 2014.

Exhibit: This is a source that backs up my claim that GM crops may be bad for your

health. This article was cited in many other articles about GM crops and health, and I

used it because it came from a university, and was therefore a reputable source.

Ryan, J. (2013, September 10). Monsanto pours $4.6 million into anti-GMO labeling

campaign. Retrieved March 16, 2014.

Background: I used this source to support my background information on how much

money major GMO companies like Monsanto pumped into advertisements against

bills that would label GMO foods.

Smith, J. M. (2007). The good, bad and ugly about GMOs. Natural Revolution.

Retrieved March 21, 2014, from http://naturalrevolution.org/gmo-

resources/the-good-bad-and-ugly-about-gmos/

Argument: I used this source to back up my argument about the fact that GM crops

13

Genetically Modified Foods

are basically changing us from the inside. It was used to instill fear into the readers

mind that we don’t exactly know what GM crops are doing to us.

14