Background: Ever since the first farmers began to plan and harvest grains more than 10,000 years ago,
humans have been looking for ways to increase agricultural production. Over the centuries and across
the globe farmers have developed tools and techniques to boost yields, such as irrigation, crop rotation,
fertilizers and pesticides. Today’s agricultural innovations are more effective than ever – but also more
controversial.
Are Genetically Modified Foods Scary?
By Palome Reyes
Ireland, between the years of 1845 and 1852, experienced a seven-year siege of mass
starvation, disease, and emigration known today as “The Great Hunger.” During this time,
approximately one million people starved to death and another two million fled for their lives,
emigrating to England, America, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and other countries. The
immediate cause of the famine was a potato blight a disease that ravaged potato crops throughout
Europe. The impact was most severe in Ireland because one-third of the population was
dependent on the potato crop for survival. Political, social, and economic factors only
exacerbated the horrendous results of the potato blight in Ireland.
Recent advances in the field of genetically modified (GM) food could have prevented the
“Great Hunger” by introducing potatoes resistant to the disease that destroyed Ireland’s potato
crop. In the 1990s, Hawaii’s papaya industry was facing disaster because of the virulent papaya
ring spot virus. In this case, a genetically modified papaya did save the day. Developed and
used since 1999, this genetically modified papaya, which resists the virus, has saved Hawaii’s
papaya industry.
The term “genetically modified food” refers to crop plants created for human and animal
consumption that use the latest molecular biology techniques to enhance desired traits, such as
resistance to disease and herbicides or increased nutritional content. Traditionally this
enhancement would have been done through plant breeding. But, breeding is time consuming
and often not very accurate. Genetic engineering – actually isolating and inserting genes with
the desirable trait into plants – can crate plants with the desired trait very rapidly and with great
accuracy. For example, plant geneticists can isolate a gene for pest resistance and insert that
gene into another plant. The plant created as a result of the inserted genes will have the desired
trait of being resistant to pests.
As exciting as the promise of GM goods may seem, some people are raising questions
about the safety and long-term effects of such foods. Although most scientists concur that no
harmful effects have yet been associated with consuming GM crops, the anti-GM-food people
resist the idea of big agricultural and biotech companies (the forces spearheading production of
GM foods) trying to control what goes into the food we eat. These opponents contend that
genetic breeding is radically different from what human beings have previously done, and that,
as a result, we are not consuming products that have never before been considered food. There
is no way of predicting what long-term effects these plants may have on the human beings and
animals that consume them. Neither is there any way of predicting what effect these foods might
have on other plans or on the environment in general. A widely publicized study published in
the fall of 2012 only added fuel to the controversy when it noted that rats fed a lifetime diet of
GM corn developed tumors, whereas those fed a non-GM diet did not.
Proponents of GM foods counter that GM plants, with their built-in protections against
disease, pests, herbicides, cold, drought, and floods will help increase food production
worldwide and thereby stem the tide of worldwide hunger. Furthermore, they argue that,
although Americans have been eating GM foods for years, no one has been able to cite a single
case of somebody actually getting sick from these foods.
It is difficult to ignore the fact that the majority of scientific research thus far indicates
that GM foods pose no threat to consumers. On the other hand, eating is something we all do
every day. Should the choice about what we put into our mouths be left up to us or to businesses
with financial interests in GM products? The GM opponents argue that the choice should be
ours and that, at the very least, GM crops should be labeled. In this way consumers would know
what they are eating and could, therefore, choose to take the risk or not.