Question

***Debate**or**Discussion**
‘Should we Genetically Modify Food?’
Ok guys I’m here with a very controversial topic. There have been many debates on this topic in the international level and I’ve decided to bring it here. It will also become a source of information to the others as well. All responses are welcome.

Answer 1

A lot of Genetically Modified Crops are increasing day by day. Most of the vegetables that we eat daily are Genetically Modified. Researchers modify or manipulate the genes of these plants in order to boost their productivity and/or make them resistant to pests, cold, drought etc. But there is a saying, “Every coin has two sides” which could mean that these GM crops may also have some bad impact on the human race. Let’s find out how we will be able to complete this discussion…:)

Answer 2

I never understood why people are against GMOs. They allow us to make more productive plants and thus allow us to feed more people. Who could possibly be against that?

Answer 3

Ok feeding people is a good point. But how do we conclude without even knowing how safe it is? Has modifying genes proven to be a success all the time? And the health risks associated with it is also unknown, or it may also become disastrous one day.

Answer 4

I would like to understand the affects of GM crops on the environment and the people. There are unanswered questions regarding regarding the potential long-term impact on human health from food derived from GMOs

Answer 5

Are GMOs not made by implanting genes from one organism into the other? if the protein that these genes code for are not detrimental to humans in one organism, why should they be in another? Is there really any case today of a GMO which turned out to be harmfull to people?

Answer 6

This is really an interesting discussion.

Answer 7

A study which took place in 2010 has found out a toxin which is Cry 1Ab which is a Bt protein in the foetal and maternal blood. The Bt toxin is commonly used as pesticides in organic farming. There are also studies which have shown that the DNA from the GM crops were transferred into human beings. whole genes from our food were detected in our plasma. There are also many more studies which have proven to make GM crops harmful to humans.

Answer 8

Some gluten disorders/allergies have also been linked to GMO's

Answer 9

First of all, I believe the study that you meant is this one: https://www.uclm.es/Actividades/repositorio/pdf/doc_3721_4666.pdf
This study is known to be flawed as this post on biofortified explains: http://www.biofortified.org/2011/04/nonsense/
In order to get the levels of CRY1ab that the researchers reported the pregnant women should have eaten multiple kilos of corn. Also, even if CRY1ab could get into maternal and fetal blood, this substance is toxic only to insects and has no harmfull effect whatsoever on humans.

As for the DNA transferring, I do not know of a study that claims that DNA can be transferred from GM crops to humans. There are, however, those that say that DNA can be transfered into the blood plasma, but that is normal for digested DNA and not in any way harmfull to us. GMO DNA is not known to behave different from other DNA and has no reason to.

Additionally, I would like to know where you got the information that GMOs can cause gluten allergies for i cannot find it anywhere.

Finally, we as humans have been manipulating the genes of our crops for thousands of years by the procces of artificial selection. There is no reason to believe that GMOs as a whole should be considered dangerous just because they are made in a lab.

Answer 10

Also, we must not forget that GMOs allow for a lower amount of pesticides to be used, allow us to manipulate foods in order to increase nutrients such as vitamins that are essential to humans and will increase our production of food which can be used to feed thirth world countries

Answer 11

Also, you have to see when Genetically modified, not engineered, foods started becoming a prominent source of industry, particularly in California. Up till now there has not been a significant effect on the human population due to genetically modified foods, atleast not to my knowledge.

Answer 12

As far as what you've said, we humans used to manipulate genes in the ancient times but Genetic engineering as the direct manipulation of DNA by humans outside breeding and mutations has only existed since the 1970s. And Why mess with mother nature? Have our ancestors used genetically modified crops for food? More than half of the world's population are suffering from diseases which were not at all reported earlier ? And yeah,if you think the lack of food is what leads to povery, its a huge NO, Its because of the financially harsh economy that had lead to such a condition

Answer 13

Think about the cost it takes to produce "organic" when half the time things are not even organic.

Answer 14

But where is solid proof that the world's population that is suffering from these so called diseases is generated solely by genetically modified foods?

Answer 15

And @Jhannybean , why take a risk. Japan had succeed in making a lot of Power using the nuclear power reactors. And then what had happened later after a Tsunami ? The entire city had to be vacated. humans are very good at manipulating nature, and it had shown very well with Disasters..

Answer 16

What i meant to say is Mother nature is not someone whom we should play with, it could lead to serious consequences.

Answer 17

We humans have "messed with mother nature" since we got into existance. Even the invention of fire is messing with mother nature. And as for the diseases maybe that is because we have a completely different lifestyle now and have many more humans now than earlier.

Answer 18

@Jhannybean , and do you have a proof to say that its NOT caused by GMO's?

Answer 19

Theres plenty of natural incidents that happen, you can even blame mother nature for creating The Dust Bowl in the mid 1930s.

Answer 20

Nope,I don't have proof, therefore I can't legitimately claim that GMOs are a probably cause to that kind of situation.

Answer 21

do you have any proof that it is NOT caused by watching TV or using cellphones?

Answer 22

Im just debating :) No hard feelings alright? Just making sure :P

Answer 23

:p

Answer 24

yeah everybody is still friends hihi

Answer 25

A debate is supposed to be like this

Answer 26

But as for manipulating mother nature, that is what we humans do and have always done since the invention of fire.

Answer 27

the thing is, those opposed to genetically modified foods have such a small case study done on the harmful effects caused by genetically modified foods. The GreenPeace campaign uses more propaganda rather than facts to promote how awful GMOs are, even though they sound like theyre pro environment and such.

Answer 28

Rats tested in a private lab in 2008 and fed GMO foods showed heart blockage, cancer and died at an earlier age than those who were fed organic foods

Answer 29

oh I that study has been severely discredited, they used rats that were very prone to cancer already and multiple mistakes where made in the experiment

Answer 30

ignore the oh I please

Answer 31

an overview of the critisism on that study can be found here: http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/06/24/republished-retracted-seralini-corn-rat-study-faces-harsh-criticism-from-scientists/

Answer 32

If GM crops are so good for humans, Then why has the The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) Technology) recommended doctors not to use prescribe GMO diets?

Answer 33

These three GMOs (MON810, MON863 and NK603) "are approved for human and animal consumption in the EU and especially the United States," notes Professor Séralini. "MON810 is the only one of the three grown in certain EU countries (especially Spain); the others are imported - Coming from The EU, whom have broken off trade with The United States over genetically modified foods in mass production due to the GMO controversy claim that there are some exceptions

Answer 34

Look through this, :) https://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/socioeconomics_impacts_of_bt_eggplant/download/Socioeconomics%20Impacts%20of%20Bt%20Eggplant.pdf

Answer 35

So only 3 GMOs to be consumed ? What about the others? So in other words they are not approved as yet. This shows that our researchers are very good at manipulating genes, but very bad at showing the public about its health issues

Answer 36

A lot of organisations don't think GMOs are a problem like for example the World Health Organisation who says "current varieties of GM foods are not likely to present risks for human health, in addition no effects on human health have been observed as a result of a consumption of such foods by the general population"

Answer 37

Perfection was made by nature, not by humans.

Answer 38

so you say that we should all go back and live like we did back in 100.000 BC?

Answer 39

But a lot of organisations also think that GMO's are bad , as i had mentioned earlier

Answer 40

Why not leave nature alone, why play with it. Thank god we humans were not there at the Jurassic Era, or we would have made it into a jurassic Park..:p

Answer 41

"perfection is not made by humans" is an argument that can be used against science in general and we both know that science has been beneficial to humans raising both our quality of living and the avarage life expectancy.

Answer 42

So we should say that humans are perfect?

Answer 43

No we shouldn't it is just because humans are not perfect that we should keep on trying to find ways to make our lifes better.

Answer 44

If we were so perfect, the would have been no poverty, discrimination and other social evils taking place now

Answer 45

Instead we are making our lives worse

Answer 46

So what you are saying now is that science is not beneficial but harmfull to humans?

Answer 47

modern medicine saves millions of lives all over the globe how could that not be beneficial?

Answer 48

Science has its both pros and cons. We humans are supposed to use it wisely. and yeah, the are many pros but equal number of cons too..the list is endless

Answer 49

Think about it, if we used Science for only good purpose, we would not have any evils taknig place now right?

Answer 50

The evil aspects of GM crops mmay not be visible now, but it will surely affect our future generation

Answer 51

im not saying science is all good im saying science overall has had a positive influence on our lifes

and even if some GM crops would be bad, which is not true, then its effects would be tested and it would not be allowed on the market. There is no reason whatsoever to think that GM crops as a whole are bad. In fact thinking that GM crops are bad and banning them is the true danger for future generations as they will then not be able to have its benefits.

Answer 52

Testing mechanisms are a waste, large Multinational Companies bribe the specific officers responsible for the approval and sell them to make millions, while billions like us suffer. And one fine day when we get some incurable diseases like cancer, they ban them citing some issues

Answer 53

I'll be back soon. I'll keep this Question Open for more suggestions

Answer 54

If the people are afraid that a specific GM crop might be bad an independant study will follow which will show whether the GM crop is detrimental to humans

Also, i will stop debating futher as i think that all issues have been discussed and futher chat will have no usefullness.

I think that i have shown that any study you brought forth that says GM crops are bad is easily refuted. Also I think that i have shown that there are no ethical problems with GM crops whatsoever. Finally I think that I have shown that GM crops will have an immense positive effect on future generations. I think that the only conclusion that can be drawn from that is that GM crops are safe and even beneficial for humans and the use of GM crops should be futher supported by govornments.

Answer 55

no problem it was great debating with you!! good luck with futher debates and/or other posts!!

Answer 56

If I am allowed to state my two cents, that Genetically Modified Food may be harmful to some of your body cells. GMO I would say is actually bad and has really no good advantages. Unless they give you super powers. As you have said before, though they feed more people but there not safe, this means the more people who eat it, the more that will become in danger of the GMO.

Answer 57

Thanx @GeniousCreation for ur suggestion. Good to see that there are atleast some people opposing GM crops here..:)

Answer 58

Instead of GM crops, why dont we stick to Organic Farming? The very natural growth of vegetables without the use of dangerous pesticides. Its Atleast very safe right?

Answer 59

It's informative to note that more than 3,000 grains, fruits and vegetables have been “created” in a laboratory by subjecting them with gamma rays and/or highly toxic chemicals to artificially scramble their DNA–and have since been marketed as organic.

Answer 60

I am strictly opposing the idea of making GMOs . I know there are safety precautions and biosafety protocol. But there are potential risks to human as well.
Like for an example there are tomatoes which are genetically modified to delay ripening process right? The vectors used in forming that contains antibiotic resistance gene. So imagine us eating those ! Those genes may pass from tomatoes to the Ecoli bacteria in the gut making it antibiotic resistant . Since bacteria leave the gut in faeces the gene may spread to other bacteria in the environment and if they infect humans they would be antibiotic resistant too right?

Answer 61

not only that right? So imagine transgenic plants passing their new genes to close relatives in nearby wild areas through pollen transfer. If crop plants carrying genes resistant to herbicide diseases or insect pests pollinate the wild ones, the offspring might become "super weeds" that are very difficult to control.Therefore there is a danger of unintended transfer of genes through cross pollionation to produce herbicide resistant weeds

Answer 62

There are certain social issues as well right? Like domination of world food production by a few companies of developed countries and bio piracy. Description : Companies that produce GM Pants attempt to patent them right? So basically the farmers have to pay royalties to sow the crop. Old method of preserving some seeds of one harvest to be used for the next season can not be practiced with this system. Farmers have to buy new seeds every year. This will badly affect the poor farmers in under developed countries

Answer 63

There are issues regarding ethics also.
one aim of genetic engineering is to increase the growth rate and yields of animals like cattle pigs and sheep right? There are many harmful effects of unregulated production of GM on the health of those animals. They are affected by heart and kidney diseases. So I personally think it is very stressful for the animals concerned. And have you all heard about the oncomouse? It is a transgenic mouse . They are containing a oncogene ( cancer causing gene). They develop tumours easily and are used in cancer research. I hate how these people think of themselves as being superior to other animals and thinking that they have the right to exploit other organisms for their own benefit. So basically we are violating intrinsic values of organisms. But what right have we got to change another animal's unique genetic constitution ? We are tampering with nature by mixing genes among species! Do we have the right to change the genetic constitution of an organism that has been evolving for billions of years? Give it some thoughts!

Answer 64

I'm sorry I went out of the topic GM food! Sorry about that. I'm a little controversial

Answer 65

since it was about food there can be objections by vegetarians to consume animal genes in plants right?

Answer 66

Some can produce new toxic substances and that might lead to allergic reactions.!

Answer 67

Sorry for being controversy!

Answer 68

@GeniousCreation that all GMOs damage your body cells is just downright not true. There are many GMOs like golden rice that have been approved and are completely safe for consumption.
In countries in south East Asia millions of people per year go blind because of vitamin A deficiency. In the example of golden rice normal rice was engineered to make more vitamin A and safe people from going blind. How could this be bad? It was known that golden rice was safe to eat and it would be beneficial to the people. Is it not truly evil to deprive the people of this food they need so much?

@rushwr
First of all, as far as I can google, those tomatoes had only one antibiotic resistance gene in them. There exist well over 150 kinds of antibiotics so I think even if this process where to happen, the damage would be very minor. Also, is there any proof that this transfer of genes from food to bacteria to other bacteria happens? And if it does happen it might take ages for it to complete.

And if all that doesn’t work, then we might just have to stop these tomatoes from entering the market (these tomatoes are not being sold). No reason to give up on GMOs only because some tomato that is not even sold had something in it that might eventually have some bad consequences if you were to eat it.

Second of all, yes super weed creation is a problem but not one that cannot be overcome, we can stop insects or wind from pollinating nearby plants (by for example only making GM crops in greenhouses) or we could kill the plants that could potentially get pollinated by these plants. Even though there is this one problem, we shouldn’t completely give up on GM crops. Also, plants made by artificial selection might get genes that protect them against insects and those could be spread by pollination. If you are against GM crops for this reason, shouldn’t you also be against artificial selection?

Third of all, yes some GM companies do bad stuff and this is a big problem and I am against these companies. But you shouldn’t confuse being against companies like Monsanto and being against GM crops. Obviously there is more regulation needed from governments to keep these companies from doing bad things but that doesn’t mean GM crops are a bad thing. Furthermore I think that whether and how companies should be kept from doing evil things is not completely relevant to this discussion.

Additionally, I think that the discussion of GMOs outside of plants is indeed irrelevant. The GM crops could be labeled so vegitarians would know if there are animal genes in them although I do think that if you don’t even want to eat something that has ever been in an animal at all you might be overdoing the vegetarian thing. I don’t think that there are GM crops that do produce toxic substances and can pass through regulation but if you know an example I would be pleased to hear of it.

Finally I think that opposition to GM crops is mainly based on fear. Fear for technology, fear for process, fear for science and fear for anything that is made in a lab. All inspired by the ever-exaggerating modern media. GMOs can do a lot of good in the world and thus are the future of biological research and although we should be cautious of things that can go wrong like the creation of superweeds we should altogether embrace them.

Answer 69

And there is a potential risk of BT gene containing plants affecting beneficial insects. And I'm not sure how practical it is to stop cross pollination.

Answer 70

And it also have lots of unknown effects on biodiversity

Answer 71

eg; Genetically modified fish such as giant salmon. If by any chance they escape in to the sea they may affect the balance of the wild salmon population. ( A gene from the fish called OCEAN POUT has been added to salmon to activate its GH gene . Then the salmon grows to 30 times its normal weight.)

Answer 72

@niels5x9 I realized that I was out of the topic so I mentioned my apologies earlier itself. :) Sorry if u had to go thru all !

Answer 73

First of all, the Bt genes might affect beneficial insects, but because we use Bt genes we can use much less insecticides which would actually harm insects more.

Biodiversity of the crops might decrease but that is an effect that could only negatively impact the crop producers so they will be stimulated to find a way to keep up the biodiversity.

Salmon is not a GM crop but extra regulation make sure that salmon couldn’t escape into the sea would do it, otherwise these giant salmon would probably not survive in the wild as they are actually less adapted to the environment than the wild type salmon

Answer 74

DNA From Genetically Modified Crops Can Be Transferred Into Humans Who Eat Them

In a new study published in the peer reviewed Public Library of Science (PLOS), researchersemphasize that there is sufficient evidence that meal-derived DNA fragments carry complete genes that can enter into the human circulation system through an unknown mechanism.(2)

In one of the blood samples the relative concentration of plant DNA is higher than the human DNA. The study was based on the analysis of over 1000 human samples from four independent studies. PLOS is an open access, well respected peer-reviewed scientific journal that covers primary research from disciplines within science and medicine. It’s great to see this study published in it, confirming what many have been suspected for years.

Answer 75

It's not GM crops are useless they are useful up to a certain point but the thing is it has more risks than benifits

Answer 76

Whatever it may be, some more news that Dr. Thierry Vein, a former Pro-GMO, who used to say that GMO's are a boon to Earth, has now started opposing this entire fact. He had retired 10 years ago after a long career as a research scientist for Agriculture Canada. He had assured that GMO's were very safe. There was, however, a growing body of scientific research – done mostly in Europe, Russia, and other countries – showing that diets containing engineered corn or soya cause serious health problems in laboratory mice and rats. You may be able to find some unscientific ways to tell that was wrong too, but this has come from the very words from an Ex-GMO scientist itself.

Answer 77

that study was used and refuted earlier in the discussion:

"There are, however, studies that say that DNA can be transfered into the blood plasma, but that is normal for digested DNA and not in any way harmfull to us. GMO DNA is not known to behave different from other DNA and has no reason to."

The study you quoted was not done specifically on GM DNA btw but on any kind of DNA

I still havent seen a single good reason to give up on GM crops while they have so much benefits for our society!!

Answer 78

Its in his own words. Here it goes.."In the last 10 years I have changed my position. I started paying attention to the flow of published studies coming from Europe, some from prestigious labs and published in prestigious scientific journals, that questioned the impact and safety of engineered food.

I refute the claims of the biotechnology companies that their engineered crops yield more, that they require less pesticide applications, that they have no impact on the environment and of course that they are safe to eat.

There are a number of scientific studies that have been done for Monsanto by universities in the U.S., Canada, and abroad. Most of these studies are concerned with the field performance of the engineered crops, and of course they find GMOs safe for the environment and therefore safe to eat.

Individuals should be encouraged to make their decisions on food safety based on scientific evidence and personal choice, not on emotion or the personal opinions of others.

We should all take these studies seriously and demand that government agencies replicate them rather than rely on studies paid for by the biotech companies.

The Bt corn and soya plants that are now everywhere in our environment are registered as insecticides. But are these insecticidal plants regulated and have their proteins been tested for safety? Not by the federal departments in charge of food safety, not in Canada and not in the U.S.

There are no long-term feeding studies performed in these countries to demonstrate the claims that engineered corn and soya are safe. All we have are scientific studies out of Europe and Russia, showing that rats fed engineered food die prematurely."

Answer 79

Genetic engineering is 40 years old. It is based on the naive understanding of the genome based on the One Gene – one protein hypothesis of 70 years ago, that each gene codes for a single protein. The Human Genome project completed in 2002 showed that this hypothesis is wrong.

The whole paradigm of the genetic engineering technology is based on a misunderstanding. Every scientist now learns that any gene can give more than one protein and that inserting a gene anywhere in a plant eventually creates rogue proteins. Some of these proteins are obviously allergenic or toxic.

Answer 80

GM stuff were actually presented 20 years ago I guess or some what like that. I am pretty sure we will have some sort of a bad effect on our future generations due to all these.

Answer 81

@shreehari499
Saying my ways of refuting your arguments that GM crops are bad are "unscientific" is just namecalling. Personally i have the feeling that the reason you say this is because you have no scientific way to disprove my arguments.

Answer 82

We don't see it as it is a little new. 20 years is not something big right? So yep that's my view on this. So I said it .

Answer 83

I showed my reasons above

Answer 84

Isnt it scientific proof to hear it from the Scientist's words itself? @niels5x9 ?

Answer 85

And may i please know the scientific ways to prove that GM corps are good for health?

Answer 86

sorry crops..:p

Answer 87

Okey this is a lot for me to read through so give me some time please

Answer 88

The main reason GM food are used is because, they are economical, pest resistant and you can modify it however you want to adapt to the market. For example, seedless grapes, seedless banana.

Answer 89

now they have GM durian that can grow regardless of seasons too

Answer 90

I would suggest you guys to have a glance at a book named 'Seeds of Deception' by a well known author called Jeffrey Smith, a researcher of GMO's on the Risks and Dangers of GMOs.

Answer 91

this is kinda stuff generally depends on whether you debate from the view of health reasons or money reasons

Answer 92

Actually there is a risk of new toxic substances to be produced. And aso allergic conditions.

Answer 93

First of all I still think it was bad to call my ways unscientific and I ask for you to withdraw that.

Second of all, this one researcher that is against GMOs is heavily sponsored by anti-GMO groups. He has spoken out against GMOs many times and all of those times the researches he quoted have been discredited for a variety of reasons related to multiple breaches of the scientific method.

Also, it is no wonder that there are scientists out there who think GMOs are bad but there are also scientists out there who think climate change isn’t real. The truth is that the huge majority of the scientists think that GMOs are not bad.

Additionally I think it is wrong in this argument to make some kind of claim to authority like that. If GMOs are bad shouldn’t you be able to show it yourself instead of hiding behind somebody else?

Furthermore regarding shreehari499 comment on the “naïve science involved in GM crop making” I think that companies are under enough pressure to improve their science for that is how they make a living. Also if GMOs make toxic substances than why don’t you give examples?

You can keep quoting pseudo-scientific discredited researches and I can keep showing why these researches were flawed all day but I have not heard you arguing against any of my points so far. The things that can be achieved using this technique are immense and the public is scared into believing this new technology s bad by the modern media.

Answer 94

They are scientifically proven ! Even if I didn't attach those. That is a fact. So withdrawing is the thing I won't do.

Answer 95

There is a misunderstanding here i was talking about a statement by shreehari499:
`You may be able to find some unscientific ways to tell that was wrong too, but this has come from the very words from an Ex-GMO scientist itself. ` see he calls me unscientific

Also I think that you have not mentioned a single research or argument that i have not shown to be wrong. If not than please tell me which one(s).

Answer 96

Instead of just finding wrong doings in our arguments, why dont you give your experimental proofs to show how healthy GM foods are?

Answer 97

although i think that the burdon of proof is on you guys here as you make the claim that there is something wrong with the food but just to get home my point, there are over 2000: of them http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/10/08/with-2000-global-studies-confirming-safety-gm-foods-among-most-analyzed-subject-in-science/

clicking 1783 studies will give you an excell document with a lot of studies showing no harm in GMOs. But why you don't hear of these studies is that the modern media isn't interested in them because they are not dramatic enough.