RUNNING HEADER: GMOs
GMOs: Seeds of Deception
Anna Katogiritis
First Colonial High School
GMOs
Abstract
Thesis: GMOs are harmful to human health and the environment and must be controlled
by the US Government.
GMOs or genetically modified organisms have recently become prevalent in food
and farming all around the world. While companies manufacturing these modified crops
claim that they are harmless to human health, studies have shown that the consumption of
GMOs may lead to numerous serious medical conditions. Presently a majority of the
food grown and produced in the United States has been genetically modified in some
way. While genetically modified crops produce their own pesticides, making them live
longer and grow larger, the possible health effects of these crops are serious and
sometimes fatal. Many counties have now banned or restricted the use of GMOs. Now
consumers all over the United States are rallying to require GMOs in foods to be labeled
or to ban them completely. So far, the only US state to ban the use of GMOs is Hawaii.
2
GMOs
GMOs: Seeds of Deception
What Are GMOs?
GMOs, or genetically modified organisms, are defined as “organisms whose
genetic characteristics have been altered by the use of genetic engineering” (GMO,
2013). While this definition pertains to a vast number of organisms around the world, in
recent years this term has become associated with nonorganic foods being sold to
American people, as well as to citizens of other countries. Genetic modification is often
used in foods to enlarge crop yield, protect against pesticides, and create larger crops.
Genetically modified or “GM” foods are able to create their own pesticides within their
seeds, helping them live longer and protect against pests (Berry, 2013). Now, research
shows that 80% of American food contains GMOs (Eng, 2012). With the recent public
awareness of the massive presence of GMOs in food, more people are speaking out than
ever before. Members of anti-GMO activist groups in over 30 states are rallying for
required labeling or a complete ban of GMOs in the United States (D’ambrosio). So then,
why are GMOs such a hot topic? What is the controversy surrounding these
“superfoods”?
A Brief History
The history of GMOs began with the discovery of the three dimensional helix
structure of DNA, which would later lead to the ability to alter genes used in farming. In
1973, Herbert Boyer and Stanley Cohen created the first organism made from
recombined genes, thus beginning the real GM field. In 1982, the US Government
approved the first genetically modified consumer product, Humulin (American Public
Media, 2014). Then, in 1983, the first transgenic plant was created. This crop, a tobacco
3
GMOs
plant, was the first gateway into modern genetic farming. In 1990, the first crop of
genetically modified cotton was successfully tested, with the introduction of Monsanto’s
pesticide resistant soybeans surfacing in 1995 (Global Change 2012).
Health Implications of GMOs
While results of tests regarding the health risks of GMOs remain inconclusive,
many experiments have pointed to GMOs being harmful to human health. Pesticides
created by GM crops have been shown to have detrimental effects on insect populations,
especially in the stomachs of insects such as bees. These negative effects have led to
research concerning the effects of GM food on the human body (Amos, 2011).
Animal testing on mammals has lead to results that show pesticides present on all
GM foods cause numerous health problems such as infertility, immune system problems,
accelerated aging, faulty insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the
gastrointestinal system (Merino). In fact, the longest running study on GMOs revealed
that tumor growth in rats undoubtedly accelerated when they were exposed to very low
doses of the pesticides found in GM corn (Philpott, 2012). When other studies were
performed, pesticides were found in mothers, fetuses, and umbilical cord blood and
shown to be potentially linked to health problems such as asthma and food allergies
(Smith 2011). So then, if GMOs have potential to be so dangerous, why are they allowed
to be used in a vast majority of American foods? The answer to this comes from counter research done by pesticide companies such as Monsanto, the producer of the pesticide
Round Up.
40% of GM foods come from the U.S, with the Monsanto corporation controlling
most of this market. Monsanto is responsible for 80% of GM corn and 93% of GM soy in
4
GMOs
this market, with acreage of GM crops at 282 million acres, up from only 3 million in
1996 (Food and Water Watch, 2013). While Monsanto has done some research regarding
the safety of GM crops, their studies have often yielded inconclusive results and consist
of minimal experimentation (Briggs, 2012). One employee of Monsanto spoke out about
his research findings after leaving the company. According to him, shepherds whose
flocks grazed on Monsanto’s GM cotton experienced an average sheep death rate of 25%
within the next week. Cows, buffalos, chickens, and horses grazing on the same product
became sterile and experienced similar results. This research was done shortly after a new
protein, known as Bt Toxin, was added into Monsanto’s GM foods, an issue which
Monsanto and allies refused to investigate further (Smith, 2007.) Since then, GMOs have
been linked to kidney disease, cancer, and other health risks, all of which have been only
lightly researched by GM food companies (Mother Earth News, 2012). In fact, Bt toxin
in spray form has been shown to increase allergic reactions and rapid cell growth in mice,
though companies who produce it often label it as harmless to humans. In the Philippines,
100 farmers living next to Bt crop fields, after accidentally inhaling pollen from the
plants, experienced dizziness, severe chest and stomach pain, vomiting, fever, and
allergies. These effects were visible in the respiratory and intestinal systems, as well as
the skin. Blood tests performed on 39 of these people resulted that an antibody response
to the Bt-toxin produced by the crops were the reason for these violent symptoms
(Lendman, 2013).
There is one study that has shown the affect of GMOs on the human body through
observation. A study by Nature Biotechnology published in 2004 showed that GM plant
5
GMOs
DNA transfers into the DNA of organisms in the human stomach, reproducing
indefinitely and causing a number of gastrointestinal issues (Benson, 2013).
Effects of GMOs on the Environment
The largest affect of GMOs on our environment is the declining bee population.
Bees are extremely important to the human ecosystem, fertilizing 80% of flowering
crops. While this may seem to only effect produce, the affect of honeybees reaches much
further, threatening the dairy and beef industries is alfalfa is not pollinated and available
for livestock feed (Boland, 2010).
GMOs have been found to be largely responsible for the decline in the bee
population in two major ways. First, the Bt protein in GMO crops causes the stomach of
insects, such as bees, to implode, thus killing entire hives of bees. This decline in the bee
population has affected entire ecosystems, and threatens to endanger the lives of humans.
Since commercial beehives pollinate 1/3 of America’s crops, the people of the world rely
on these insects to keep the farming industry strong (Boland, 2010).
The second major cause of bee health issues due to GMOs is the increased use of
pesticides because of GM plants. While some genetically modified organisms produce
their own pesticides, others are modified to form a resistance to pesticides. Because of
this, farmers often use pesticides more liberally around GM crops, thus increasing the
amount of pesticides in the surrounding environment (Dill, 2010). Since GMOs were
introduced, pesticide use has increased by over 527 million pounds (Benson, 2013).
Another affect of GMOs on the insect population is infertility. Many
genetically modified plants are created to purposefully produce infertile seeds that
farmers cannot replant, therefore creating the need for farmers to purchase more of the
6
GMOs
company’s seeds. When bees ingest and try to pollinate with these seeds, their digestive
tracts can become extremely discolored, dysfunctional, and painful, often leading to
infertility. This has occurred on a global scale, causing a dramatic decline in the bee
population over the past 4 years (Amos, 2011).
Bt corn also threatens the ecosystems that it is planted near. The pesticides soak
into the soil, endangering all plant species that are not engineered to produce the toxin.
Pesticides also wash into stream ecosystems, killing fish and other aquatic animals (NSF,
2012).
Cross-contamination can happen in a number of ways, such as pollination by
wind or insects. These contaminated species can then make their way into the food chain
of other organisms, such as insects and herbivores. Then, these organisms are consumed
by carnivorous animals, contaminating entire ecosystems in a small period of time. Since
GMOs have been shown to pose health risks to non-human animals, GM crops have
negative effects on the animals in a contaminated environment (Dill, 2010.)
Finally, GMOs have a devastating impact on soil quality. While farmers in the
past gave their soil breaks up to 4 years between growing cycles, genetically modified
crops are often planted continuously due to their high harvest yields and opportunity for
financial gain. Because of this, soil quality has decreased in many areas due to the large
number of crops (most of which are genetically modified) being planted without giving
the soil a break. Furthermore, GMOs decrease soil quality by contaminating organic
organisms with genetically modified DNA. Much like the effect of GMOs on the human
stomach, GM crops exchange DNA with microbes in the soil, causing abnormal activity
that leads to decrease in soil quality and productivity. (Suurkula, 2010)
7
GMOs
Effects on Farmers
With the Monsanto corporation and other large GM farming businesses growing
most of the food in the United States, small farmers no longer have the grasp they one did
on the farming industry. Companies like Monsanto have also found innovative ways to
keep farmers loyal to their company and unable to individualize their farming. Monsanto
and other GM farming companies often sell seeds to small farmers, which they can then
plant, harvest and sell. However, GM seeds are often modified to remain completely
infertile, making farmers unable to plant seeds from their crops and develop a reliance on
the company. For farming ventures like Monsanto, this means a consistent and definite
incoming revenue each time a farmer needs more crops (Kruft, 2001).
However, even if the seeds are biologically able to be replanted, many companies
forbid planting seeds from patented genetically modified crops. While most normal
farming companies would not be able to make this restriction, since most genetically
modified foods are patented by the companies who created them, farmers may not replant
GM seeds. The Supreme Court recently ruled in favor of Monsanto in their ability to sue
farmers who planted their patented genetic seeds without permission. While the case did
cover replanting, it also covered farmers who unknowingly planted Monsanto’s seeds due
to genetic pollution and exchange of DNA from genetic crops inadvertently found on the
farmers’ fields (Farm Futures, 2014).
International Legislative Action
Many countries other than the United States have begun taking action against
GMOs in their foods. 60 countries so far have banned or restricted the use of GMOs in
farming (Brochu). Trials have been conducted against GM farmers for harming the
8
GMOs
environment and endangering human health (GENET, 2013). Two countries, including
China, cancelled their orders of wheat from the United Sates when they found that the
wheat contained GMOs (Reuters, 2012). Many countries have decided to cut their ties
with GMOs altogether, with 26 countries banning them completely (Bello, 2013).
Legislative action in the United State of America
More than 15 states in the U.S. are seeking to ban GMOs in American food
(Brochu, 2012). 26 states currently have bills in place to require foods containing GMOs
to be labeled (D’Ambrosio). The Monsanto Protection Act, a bill banning the labeling of
GMOs and advocating for the ability of GM farmers to do what they please, has recently
been upturned and denied renewal. This development means that required labeling of GM
foods may be a future possibility for the United States (Sheets, 2013).
Not much legislative action has yet been taken in the United States. However,
with GMO labeling advocates in over 30 states, people are beginning to pay attention to
what is being put into their foods (D’Ambrosio). Just recently, in December, 2013,
Hawaii became the first state to begin bans on GMOS.
Advocacy of GMOs
Despite opposition, there are still those who believe that GMOs should not be
banned, nor should they be required to be labeled. Among these are the Monsanto
corporation and the FDA. FDA studies have not shown any proof that GMOs are harmful
to human health. However, many other studies, as well as personal accounts have
conflicted with these findings. Even so, the FDA refuses to perform more studies on the
effects of GMOs, as the FDA is not required to perform studies on any food product that
they do not believe to be substantially different than any market alternative (Reuters).
9
GMOs
Other advocates of GMOs state that genetic farming is needed to feed the world.
It is no secret that genetic modification produces larger, more resilient crops, with higher
yields and less risks of dying before being consumed. With the current issue of world
hunger, many argue that genetic farming is the only way to feed a rapidly growing world
population. However, research shows that approximately 1/3 of all edible food produced
is thrown in the garbage. That means that only 2/3 of the food being produced around the
world is actually being consumed. With figures such as this, it is easy to see that genetic
farming is not the answer to solving world hunger. Rather, reducing wastefulness would
be the most effective way of making sure that everyone has enough food to go around
(Huff).
The FDA insists that the required labeling of GMOs is not logical. The
organization states that since no health differences have been found between GM and
Organic foods, required labeling of GMOs could be misleading. However, various studies
have shown GMOs to be potentially harmful to human health. The FDA also cites cases
in other countries where GM foods have been taken entirely off the shelves of markets
because of the consumers’ fear due to GM labeling. However, the fight against GMOs
does not have to do with big businesses as much as it has to do with the American people.
If the consumer reports show reduced demand for GM foods after GM labeling, then
there is no reason why corporations such as Monsanto should be producing GM foods.
The laws of supply and demand do not shift simply because a large corporation begins to
lose revenue (Byrne, 2010).
Recent Legislation
10
GMOs
Hawaii has become a major advocate against genetic farming in recent years. In
2013, the island of Kauai successfully passed a law regarding the disclosure of
information by genetic farming companies. This law requires all biotech farming
companies to report to the county which of their foods are being genetically modified,
and how. The companies will also be required to study the effect of GM crops on the
environment and on the health of citizens (Cocke, 2013).
A week after this law was passed in Kauai, the mayor of Honolulu signed a bill
into law banning genetic farming companies from the island, and prohibiting farmers
there from planting any more genetically modified crops. While this ban excludes
genetically modified papaya on the island, it includes all other crops. Genetic farming
companies such as Monsanto, Syngenta, and Pioneer have farmland on the island and
will not be able to continue farming their genetically modified crops (Robbins, 2013).
The state of Connecticut also took legislative action in 2013, becoming the first
state to sign a bill requiring labeling of GMOs in food. However, this measure contains
the other Northeastern states of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Rhode Island and Vermont must and must receive support from these states in order to
officially become a law. While the state government of Maine is in favor of GMO
labeling laws, other Northeastern states are not yet known to be for or against the bill.
Before receiving the approval of each of the aforementioned states, the bill cannot
become a law. However, Connecticut is still the first US state to approve a GMO labeling
bill (Williams, 2013). Missouri has also taken a step towards regulation of GMOs,
banning GM crops on National Wildlife reserves (Dunn, 2013).
Concluding
11
GMOs
GMOs have been shown to have harmful effects on both the environment and on
human health. GMOs have been linked to a large number of harmful side effects in
mammals. While these side effects have not been definitively attributed to humans, there
have been medical cases where human health problems have been linked to exposure to
Bt proteins found in GM crops. All arguments against the proposed required labeling of
GMOs are for the benefits of large corporations rather than the American people. Over 60
foreign countries have taken legal action against GMOs, some banning them altogether.
With such a large market for GMOs in America, it is easy to see why people might be
concerned about what is being put into their food. There are no valid reasons why GMOs
should not be labeled, as the health of the American people is more important than the
monetary intake of large corporations. People have a right to be aware of what is in the
food they consume.
12
GMOs
References
Amos, Brit. "Death of the Bees. Genetically Modified Crops and the Decline of Bee
Colonies in North America." Global Research. N.p., 9 Aug. 2011. Web.
<http://www.globalresearch.ca/death-of-the-bees-genetically-modified-crops-and-thedecline-of-bee-colonies-in-north-america/25950>.
"At Issue: Genetically Modified Foods." N.p., 2013. Web. <http://sks.sirs.com/cgibin/hst-article-display?id=SVC00087-07594&artno=0000307142&type=ART&shfilter=U&key=Genetically%20modified%20fo
ods&title=At%20Issue%3A%20Genetically%20Modified%20Foods&res=Y&ren=N&go
v=N&lnk=N&ic=N>.
Benson, Jonathan. "Seven Ways GMO Toxicity Affects Animals, Plants and Soil."
NaturalNews. N.p., 23 Jan. 2013. Web.
<http://www.naturalnews.com/038792_gmo_toxicity_digestion_cancer.html>.
Berry, Ian. "Pesticides Make a Comeback." Wall Street Journal 22 May 2013: n. pag.
Print.
Boland, Maria. "The Importance of Honeybees." MNN. N.p., 3 May 2010. Web.
<http://www.mnn.com/local-reports/pennsylvania/local-blog/the-importance-ofhoneybees>.
Brochu, Nicole. "Pepperidge Farm Goldfish 'natural'? Mom Sues to Object." Los Angeles
Times n.d.: n. pag. Print.
Cayford, Jerry. "Breeding Sanity into the GM Food Debate: The Issues of Concern to
Critics Are Far More Complex than Advocates Car to Admit; It's Time for a More Farranging Discussion." Issues in Science and Technology Winter 2004: n. pag. Web.
13
GMOs
Cocke, Sophie. "Kauai's GMO and Pesticide Bill Is Set to Become Law after Veto
Override." Honolulu Civil Beat 16 Nov. 2013: n. pag. Print.
Collier, Paul. "The Politics of Hunger." The Council of Foreign Relations Inc. n.d.: n.
pag. Web.
Crossfield, Paula. "Genetically Engineered Foods Threaten to Contaminate Organic
Food." N.p., n.d. Web.
Cummins, Ronnie. "Genetically Engineered Foods Are Hazardous." N.p., n.d. Web.
D'Ambrosio, Dan. "You Know What You're Eating?" USA Today n.d.: n. pag. Print.
Dill, John. "The Dangers of GMOs: Know the Environmental Hazards." NaturalNews.
N.p., 28 Sept. 2010. Web. <http://www.naturalnews.com/029869_GMOs_dangers.html>.
Dunn, Collin. "GMO Bans, Laws, and Labels from Around the World." TreeHugger.
N.p., 12 Dec. 2013. Web. <http://www.treehugger.com/green-food/gmo-bans-laws-andlabels-from-around-the-world.html>.
Eng, Monica. "Activists: Modified Corn Not so Sweet." Chicago Tribune 4 Aug. 2012: n.
pag. Print.
"GMO." Def. 1. Dictionary.com. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.
Harmon, Amy, and Andrew Pollack. "Battle Lines Drawn in U.S. on Genetically
Modified Foods." International Herald Tribune 26 May 2012: n. pag. Print.
Haugen, David M. "The Safeness of Genetically Modified Foods Is Unproven." N.p., n.d.
Web.
"Health Risks of Genetically Modified Foods." Lancet 29 May 1999: n. pag. Web.
"History of Genetically Modified Foods." Global Change. N.p., n.d. Web.
<http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/workspace/sect008/s8g5/his
14
GMOs
tory.htm>.
"History of GMOS." American Public Media. N.p., n.d. Web.
<http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/gmos_india/history.html>.
Huff, Ethan A. "Don't Believe the Lie: Organic Farming Can Feed the World." N.p., n.d.
Web.
Kallas, Julia. "Q&A: Health Impacts of Genetically Modified Food Still Unknown."
Global Information Network. N.p., n.d. Web.
Kruft, David. Impact of Genetically Modified Crops and Seeds on Farmers. Rep. Penn
State Law, Nov. 2001. Web.
Lendman, Stephen. "Seeds of Destruction." International Communications Jan. 2009: n.
pag. Web.
Merino, Noel. "Genetically Modified Foods Could Pose Numerous Health Risks." N.p.,
n.d. Web.
Paton, Dean. "Ballot Measure to Label GMO Foods Is a Tossup in Washington State."
The Christian Sceince Monitor 4 Nov. 2013: n. pag. Web.
Philpott, Tom. "Longest-running GMO Study Finds Tumors in Rats." Mother Earth News
Apr.-May 2013: n. pag. Web.
Reuters, Thomas. "Biotech Wheat Furor Shows GM Food Safety Debate Far from
Settled." Reuters Media. N.p., n.d. Web.
Robbins, Ocean. "Hawaiian Mayor Signs GMO Ban into Law." Alternet. N.p., 9 Dec.
2013. Web. <http://www.alternet.org/food/hawaiian-mayor-signs-gmo-ban-law>.
"Should Genetically Modified Foods Be Labeled?" McClatchy-Tribune News Service 10
June 2013: n. pag. Print.
15
GMOs
Smith, Jeffrey M. "Frankenstein Peas." ECOLOGIST n.d.: n. pag. Web.
Smith, Jeffrey M. "GMO Toxins in Women and Fetuses." Amass 16 (2011): 12+. Web. 8
Oct. 2013.
<http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/AcademicJournalsDetailsPage/AcademicJournalsDetails
Window?query=&prodId=OVIC&displayGroupName=Journals&limiter=&source=&dis
ableHighlighting=true&displayGroups=&sortBy=&search_within_results=&action=2&c
atId=&activityType=&documentId=GALE%7CA270374605&userGroupName=va_s_12
8_0610&jsid=ab54421915f7719afea18766fd27f9d6>.
Smith, Jeffrey M. "Monsanto Whistleblower Says Genetically Engineered Crops May
Cause Disease." Synthesis/Regeneration Winter 2007: n. pag. Web.
"Supreme Court Won't Hear Appeal of Case against Monsanto." Farm Futures. Farm
Futures, 15 Jan. 2014. Web. 15 Jan. 2014.
Suurkula, Jaan, MD. "Genetically Engineered Crops - a Threat to Soil Fertility?"
PSRAST, 14 Dec. 2010. Web. 13 Jan. 2014.
United States of America. National Science Foundation. Genetically Engineered Corn
May Harm Stream Ecosystems. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.
"Why to Support Labeling GM Foods." Mother Earth News n.d.: n. pag. Web.
Williams, Donald E., Jr., and Tara Cook-Littman. "Labeling GMOs Protects People,
Environment." Hartford Courant. N.p., 20 Dec. 2013. Web.
<http://articles.courant.com/2013-12-20/news/hc-op-williams-connecticut-labels-gmoprotects-peo-20131220_1_gmo-crops-labeling-modified-organisms>.
16