RUNNING HEAD: GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 1

Genetically Modified Foods: The Good, The Bad, and Ethically Wrong

Tanya Staton

06/21/2014

MPH 560

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 2

Abstract

This paper examines genetically modified (GM) foods. The science and distribution of these

products will be discussed as well as the positive and negative concerns that arise with

genetically engineered (GE) products. The ethical issue of not labeling GM products will be

examined from a pro-versus-con view. Finally, the paper will explore both sides in the great

debate between supporters and detractors of labeling laws in the United States for GM products.

Keywords: genetically modified, genetically engineered

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 3

Genetically Modified Foods:

The Good, the Bad & the Ethically Wrong

Shopping at a grocery store can be overwhelming because of the abundance of available

products. For individuals choosing to avoid processed foods or foods that have been genetically

modified (GM) it can be even more challenging. When a consumer is shopping in the produce

section they have to be incredibly educated on what to look for in a product if it has been altered.

Genetically changed fruits and vegetables are not thirty feet tall nor do they have unusual

powers; they look exactly the same as produce that has been grown with traditional fertilizers

and pesticides or an organic fruit or vegetable. GM produce can be hard to pick out because most

of the time it is not labeled, mostly unpackaged and mixed in with other produce. So why are

these labels absent? Is there any legislation at all? These questions are coming more to the

forefront of shoppers’ minds as people are educated on genetically modified foods. There is

currently little regulation on food labeling requirements on products that are genetically

engineered (GE) in this country. Many have been fighting a “right to know” campaign in an

effort to make labeling these foods a requirement and not an option.

We have been consuming GM products for over 20 years. The first GE crop that was

available on the market was the tomato in 1994, but the product was no longer sold in 1998, due

to not meeting certain expectations (gmocompass.org, 2006). GM crops that are currently grown

in the United States include corn, soybean, cotton, canola, sugarbeet, alfalfa, papaya and squash

(ISAAA, 2013). Not only are these products sold separately, but they are also used in processed

foods and feed for animals. Consumers are purchasing products with little to no information on

where their food supply is coming from. The nation is at a crossroads on this issue. Is it ethically

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 4

right that our food continues to be modified without our consent? Is it acceptable that the

majority of people are consuming genetically altered products without realizing it?

The Science of GM Foods

So what actually makes our food supply genetically modified? Like humans all plants

and animals contain cells with a nucleus that holds our DNA. When the genetic makeup of

animals, plants or bacteria is altered these organisms are then considered to be genetically

modified (CSIRO, 2011). One way to achieve this is through GM breeding, which involves

combining different genes from different organisms (CSIRO, 2011). For example, GM cotton

uses a gene from a bacteria that is naturally resistant to insects (CSIRO, 2011). In Australia

pesticide use was reduced by 80 percent when combing the cotton and bacterial gene (CSIRO,

2011). Gene splicing, gene silencing and bacterial carriers are other common techniques that are

used in genetic modification. The use of genome sequencing has helped lead scientists to

discover traits that can allow for optimal growth in plants and animals. By changing the genetic

makeup of the organism you can alter various traits, i.e. taste, color, shape and disease resistance

(ISAAA, 2013). In 1996, the first insect-resistant crops were introduced to the world, changing

agriculture as we know it (USDA ERS, 2012). It is no surprise that most research on GM crops

has been conducted in developed countries, but developing countries have the capability for GE

as well (ISAAA, 2013). In 2013, 27 countries elected to plant biotech crops, surprisingly only

eight were industrialized countries and the rest were developing (ISAAA, 2013). Their

popularity is astounding. From 1996 to 2013 GM crop hectares have increased from 1.7 million

to 175 million hectares (ISAAA, 2013).

The Positive Aspects of GM Foods

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 5

GM products can actually be beneficial and provide added health benefits to our diet. For

starters, they can be altered to have a higher nutritional content. For example, increased levels of

beta-carotene could be added to help with Vitamin A deficiencies (findourcommonground.com,

2014). Underdeveloped countries can benefit from this because their daily nutrient content is

seldom met. GM foods can also be enhanced to improve the quality and taste of foods. Fruits and

vegetables that have been modified will stay fresh longer than traditionally grown produce

(findourcommonground.com, 2014).

GM foods can have a significant global impact. In 2013, the world had 7.1 billion

people, this number could rise to more than 9.5 billion by the year 2050 (prb.org, 2013). How

can we possibly keep up with the world’s food supply with the population increasing so rapidly?

Because GM foods have the ability to be mass produced they can prevent and/or decrease the

global food crisis. This in turn will give countries increased food security. GM crops can also be

engineered to grow in special environments, thus developing countries would be able to grow

more crops which would allow for their economy to grow as well (findourcommonground.com,

2014). Iowa State University claims that global food prices could increase 10 percent for

soybeans and up to six percent for corn if GE was not available (findourcommonground.com,

2014).

There are many environmental benefits that are associated with producing GM crops. It is

estimated that 30 percent of crops are lost even before harvest due to pests (Mckie, 2012). Not to

mention the reported cases of pesticide poisoning in agriculture workers can be anywhere from

10,000 to 20,000 cases annually (Phipps & Park, 2002). Having crops that are genetically altered

can change this because GM crops can reduce pesticide use. In 2000, GM cotton reduced

pesticide use by a total of 22.3 million kg (park, 2002). By not using pesticides workers will

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 6

further avoid contaminating groundwater. Not using the machinery to spray the crops with

pesticides could salvage 20.5 million liters of diesel and could lead to a reduction of 73,000 tons

of carbon dioxide into our atmosphere (Phipps et al, 2002). GM foods are promising because

they reduce the carbon footprint, but they can also be damaging.

The Negative Aspects of GM Foods

Globally, GM products sound beneficial but in reality we are further broadening the

economic gap between developed countries and developing countries because of this advanced

technology (ISAAA, 2013). Developing countries will devote more money to GE than to

technologies that would better benefit their country’s economic status. The health risks

associated with GM foods are also still unclear, but autism, reproductive disorders and digestive

problems have been on the rise since GM crops were introduced (responsibletechnology.org,

2013). It is believed that GM foods can be introducing allergens and other anti-nutrition factors

in foods if not careful (ISAAA, 2013). The World Health Organization States (2013), “the

transfer of genes from commonly allergenic foods is discouraged unless it can be demonstrated

that the protein product of the transferred gene is not allergenic” (concern for human health, para

2). Although, the possibility is extremely low another concern is antibiotic resistance (gmo

compass, 2006).

There are also crop issues that could occur. Crop issues that could happen include toxins

from GM crops affecting organisms that were not supposed to be targeted (ISAAA, 2013). From

an environmental standpoint we could be harming the susceptibility of other organisms that do

not affect the crop. For example, the monarch butterflies population has decreased by 50 percent

because its habitat is being destroyed by the GM crops herbicide roundup

(responsibletechnology.org, 2013). Most importantly, GMOs contaminate the environment

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 7

indefinitely. Once they are cross pollinated it will be nearly impossible to make the strains pure

again (responsibletechnology.org, 2013). Organic farmers are currently having a difficult time

keeping their seeds pure for this reason.

Government Regulation of GM Products

Government regulation currently varies from country to country (WHO, 2013). The

countries that currently do have regulation on GM foods focus their efforts on assessing the risks

for their consumers’ health (WHO, 2013). The World Health Organization states (2013) that

“countries’ legislation typically regulates GMOs in general, taking into account health and

environmental risks, as well as control-and trade-related issues e.g. labeling and testing” (gm

foods regulated nationally, para.1). So what is the United States government doing to protect its

citizens from GM products? The United States is one of the most developed and technologically

advanced countries in the world, yet it still has not mandated a nationwide labeling or ban of GM

products. Below is a map showing what countries currently require labeling or have even banned

GMOs.

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 8

http://www.labelgmos.org/the_science_genetically_modified_foods_gmo

Currently, in the United States the Food and Drug Administration gives manufacturers

the option to provide voluntary labeling if their product is engineered (FDA.gov, 2014). For the

companies that label their product, how do you know if it is genetically modified? It is not like

they place a big red sticker on their produce that says “I’m a GMO.” One way is to look at the

price lookup number or PLU code on the sticker (Lipman, 2002). If the product only contains

four numbers in its PLU code then it was grown traditionally with herbicides and pesticides, but

was not genetically altered (Lipman, 2002). If the product contains five numbers and begins with

the number eight then the produce is a GM product, and if the produce contains five numbers and

begins with a nine then the product is organic (Lipman, 2002).

The Ethical Debate Concerning Labeling Requirements

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 9

There is growing negative stigma attached to genetically altered foods in the minds of

consumers. Many people feel it is not ethically right to not label genetically engineered products

without being informed of the changes. You would think that labeling a product would not be

that difficult and everyone would be in agreement, yet there are individuals that are in strong

opposition of requiring the products to be labeled.

Pro-Labeling GM Products

There are 64 countries that require labeling, but the United States is not one of them

(labelgmos.org, n.d). American citizens feel they have the right to know what is in their food

supply even if they do not fully understand the ingredients. A 2010 healthcare survey found that

93 percent of Americans believed there should be GMO labeling requirements and because of

this there has been a huge push for the right to know (gmo.org, n.d). As of now, states are the

deciding factor in voting and passing legislation.

Connecticut was the first state to pass the requirement for GM food labeling (Simon,

2013). The map below shows states in blue that currently have legislation in process and states in

green who have successfully passed some form of legislation (righttoknow.org, 2013).

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 10

http://www.righttoknow-gmo.org/states

In 2011, a poll showed that GM labeling was supported by 89 percent of Republicans and 93

percent of Democrats (righttoknow.org, 2013). So why does legislation continue to fail when

bills are brought up on labeling requirements? Sadly, the main reason is money.

Anti-Labeling GM Products

Companies like The Grocery Manufacturers Association are in strong opposition of

labeling GMOs. They actually donated $11 million dollars in the 2013 elections to help

compress labeling efforts (Andrews, 2014). The Grocery Manufacturers Association claims that

labeling is not necessary since there has yet to be any hard evidence that GM products are indeed

bad for our health, yet 64 other countries require labeling (labelgmos.org, n.d). Other major

corporations invested in the opposition of labeling include PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, Nestle, General

Mills, Campbells, Hersheys, Del Monte and Kelloggs (inspirationgreen.com, n.d). Most would

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 11

find it surprising that these companies also have millions of dollars invested in the production of

organic produce. If labeling laws are to be mandated then a new problem would arise within the

organic community. The USDA organic label would have to worry about competing with non-

GMO labels. A consumer who is choosing to eat cleaner might opt to pick the non-GMO product

because it will still be cheaper than organic. If they are uneducated about the way their food is

grown they might not realize that their food still contains pesticides and fertilizers. At least now

people who are choosing to avoid GM foods naturally gravitate toward organic because non-

GMO is not labeled yet. Currently, it is a win-win for these huge corporations. People are eating

GM foods without realizing it and they are consuming organic produce.

Advocates for GM products also feel the cost of labeling could actually make our food

costs increase by 10 percent (McWilliams, 2014). It is not the labeling that will actually be

expensive but the enforcement of compliance and segregating GM seed from non-GM seed

(McWilliams, 2014). According to McWilliams (2014), “85 percent of U.S. corn, 95 percent of

U.S. sugar beets and canola and 91 percent of U.S. soy are genetically modified” (para. 9). Even

harder to segregate would be processed foods since up to 75 percent contain at least some form

of genetically changed ingredient (McWilliams, 2014). When GM advocates mention the cost of

food increasing then consumer support drops and they become willing to vote no for labeling

requirements. Once again it all comes back to money.

Conclusion and Future of GM Products

People have different values and beliefs toward food. Some cultures even assign religious

significance to what they eat. It is not surprising then that labeling GM products has become a

hot-button ethical issue. The future of GM products and labeling still remains unclear. One goal

for the future is to produce GM crops with enhanced vitamins, minerals and fatty acids to help

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 12

combat chronic diseases like diabetes, heart disease, obesity and even cancer (gmocompass.org,

2006). Monsanto is working on DroughtGard, which is a hybrid corn that can still grow even

when water is scarce (Stecker, 2012). This can allow for less irrigation in times of drought, and

could save millions of gallons of water every year. In retrospect genetically engineered products

sound like the answer to help the global food crisis and become healthier. The problem is we

really have no idea what future damage is being done to our bodies due to eating these products

now. It is clear that GM foods have the potential to be good and bad for us in many different

ways. Whether it has to do with our health, our economic status or something as seemingly

simple as customer education on a product, labeling for GM foods has become an ethical issue

that will not subside until labeling is mandated or the product is banned.

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 13

References

Andrews, J. (2014). New Federal Bill Aims to Squash State GMO-Labeling Efforts. Retrieved

from http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2014/04/new-federal-bill-aims-to-squash-state-

gmo-labeling-efforts/#.U6Gyv_ldWSp

Find Our Common Ground. (2014). GMO Foods. Retrieved from

http://findourcommonground.com/food-facts/gmo-foods/

Food and Drug Administration. (2014). Questions and Answers on Food from Genetically

Engineered Plants. Retrieved from

http://www.fda.gov/food/foodscienceresearch/biotechnology/ucm346030.htm

GMO Compass. (2006). Antibiotic Resistance Genes: A Threat?. Retrieved from

http://www.gmocompass.org/eng/safety/human_health/46.antibiotic_resistance_genes_th

reat.html

GMO Compass. (2006). Fruits and Vegetables. Retrieved from http://www.gmo-

compass.org/eng/grocery_shopping/fruit_vegetables/15.genetically_modified_tomatoes.h

tml

GMO Compass. (2006). Plants for the Future- Research Agenda 2025. Retrieved from

http://www.gmo-

compass.org/eng/news/stories/177.plants_future_research_agenda_2025.html

Inspiration Green. (n.d). Companies Against GMO Labeling. Retrieved from

http://www.inspirationgreen.com/vote-yes-on-37.html

Institute for Responsible Technology. (2013). 10 Reasons to Avoid GMOs. Retrieved from

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/10-Reasons-to-Avoid-GMOs

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 14

ISAAA (2013). ISAAA Brief 46-2013: Executive Summary. Retrieved from

http://isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/46/executivesummary/default.asp

ISAAA. (2013, August). Q and A About Genetically Modified Crops. Retrieved from

http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/pocketk/1/default.asp

Label GMOs. (n.d). What Are We Eating. Retrieved from

http://www.labelgmos.org/the_science_genetically_modified_foods_gmo

Lipman, F. (2002). What Do Those Codes on Stickers of Some Fruits and Veggies Mean?

Retrieved from http://www.drfranklipman.com/what-do-those-codes-on-stickers-of-

fruits-and-some-veggies-mean/

McKie, R. (2012). GM Foods: We can no longer afford to ignore its advantages. Retrieved from:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/oct/13/gm-food-crops-genetic-

modification

McWilliams, J. (2014). The Price of Your Right to Know. Retrieved from

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/05/gmo_food_labels_wo

uld_label_laws_in_vermont_maine_connecticut_increase_food.html

Park, P. (2002). Environmental Benefits of Genetically Modified Crops. Retrieved from:

http://biotechbenefits.croplife.org/paper/environmental-benefits-of-genetically-modified-

crops-global-and-european-perspectives-on-their-ability-to-reduce-pesticide-use/

Phipps, R. H., Park, J. R. (2002). Environmental benefits of genetically modified crops: Global

and European perspectives on their ability to reduce pesticide use. Journal of Animal and

Feed Sciences. p 1-18.

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS 15

Population Reference Bureau. (2013). 2013 World Population Data Sheet. Retrieved from

http://www.prb.org/pdf13/2013-population-data-sheet_eng.pdf

Right to Know. (2013). Take Action in Your State. Retrieved from: http://righttoknow-

gmo.org/states

Simon, M. (2013). How Grass Advocates Beat the Biotech and Food Lobbies. Retrieved from

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michele-simon/gmo-labeling-

connecticut_b_3386010.html

Stecker, T. (2012). Drought-Tolerant Corn Shows Positive Early Results. Retrieved from

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/drought-tolerant-corn-trials-show-positive-

early-results/

USDA ERS. (2012, July 12). Adoption of Genetically Engineered Crops in the U.S. Retrieved

from http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/adoption-of-genetically-engineered-crops-

in-the- us.aspx#.UaNunRytJdQ

World Health Organization. (2013). 20 Questions about Genetically Modified Foods. Retrieved

from http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/biotech/20questions/en/