Sandlin 1

Grayson Sandlin

Instructor: Malcom Campbell

UWRT 1104

Nov. 8, 2017

Extended Inquiry Project: The Dark Secrets of GMOs

I will be analyzing the positives and negatives of turning the foods humans eat into Ge-

netically Modified Organisms in relation to peoples health and the environment, as well as the

current issues on labeling and ethics laws. Genetically Modified Organisms or GMOs for

short, are plants, animals or an organism whose genetic makeup has been modified or altered to

create combinations of plant, animal, viral or bacterial genes that would not be able to occur nat-

urally. Being able to change the genetic makeup of crops necessary to humans across the globe

allowed for the crops to be resistant to various herbicides, insects and bacteria that previously

posed a great threat to the crops and also generated very large profits for the companies that cre-

ated them which is the real reason behind the use of GMOs(Freedom Articles).

GMOs and Genetically Modified Foods have not been around all that long. GMOs actu-

ally werent put into use nationally around 1994. It was in 1994 that the first ever genetically

modified crop was made legal by the FDA. The crop was the Flavr Savr tomato that was engi-

neered to ripen slower than natural tomatoes in order to prevent them from becoming soft and

mushy(University of Cali. Agriculture). About one year after the Flavr Savr tomato was re-

leased, an insect resistant potato was approved by the FDA in 1995 and by 1996 there had been

eight Genetically Modified Foods approved by the FDA for use in The United States(The Inter-

national Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications).

 Sandlin 2

Selective breeding has been practiced by humans since prehistory which is between 5.3

million and 5,300 years ago. Selective breeding can be easily thought of as breeding a Labrador

and a Poodle and getting a Labradoodle as the result. In simple terms GMOs are basically the

same thing as cross breeding dogs. When two different dogs are bred together to create a new

dog it has been found that the cross bred dogs end up having blood disorders, skin issues as well

as hearing and vision problems(PBS). Forcing different genes together in crops to create a new

crop is essentially the same as cross breeding two dogs except when it occurs with crops scien-

tists will combine way more than just two crops to make a new one(NCBI). If two dogs breeding

can cause all sorts of problems then just imagine what kind of problems can occur when several

plants genes are forced together in a lab.

Ethics has also become a largely debated topic when it comes to GMOs since GMOs are

not only limited to crops. Animals such as fish have also been genetically modified for public

purchase. In 1999 a gene that causes a fluorescent glow was extracted from a jellyfish and forced

into the genome of a Zebrafish. Then in 2003 the fish was marketed and sold as GloFish in

Taiwan as the first ever genetically modified animal(Science Direct). It is easy to see that this

use of science on animals would soon cause debate on the treatment and ethical standard humans

have towards animals. The fish were also sold in The United States as well. Then in 2003 a law-

suit was filed against the FDA saying the sale of the fish needed to stop and that the FDA had no

jurisdiction over the matter. After the matter was taken to court it was found that the lawsuit had

no merit and was dismissed in 2005(Science Direct).

The labeling of food products containing GMOs has become the center of the great de-

bate of GMOs. Since the first food products containing GMOs were introduced to the public in

1995 companies who made the products were not required to label their products as containing
 Sandlin 3

GMOs. Over time as GMOs had gained popularity and people began to realize they may not be

safe or healthy for humans labeling has became a heated debate among the people. For example,

if someone wanted to only eat organic foods they would not know whether or not a product con-

tained GMOs in most cases. In July of 2016, legislation was sent to Barrack Obama that would

require foods containing GMOs to have a label or symbol that allowed consumers to know if

GMOs were present in the product(NBC News). However, there is much concern in the new law

because there are several loop holes for companies to get around labeling as well as weak pun-

ishments according to senators from across the country as well as organic food companies(NBC

News). The Agriculture Department has two years to write out all the details of the law which

will surely cause more debates until it is finalized and even more debates after it is put into ac-

tion.

As with all topics of debate there are two sides to the argument. While there is clearly a

side against GMOs there is also a side for the use of GMOs just as strong as the side against

them. Due to the fact that GMOs have not been in use for longer than about 20 years no one for

sure knows the long-term effects on humans. However, all the studies done have shown there are

no health hazards to humans who eat foods that contain GMOs even though some people will

still argue they can pose a long term risk(Washington Post). Also since it has been mostly agreed

upon that GMOs are safe many would argue that labeling is no longer necessary on foods that

contain GMOs. Another argument posed by those who are for GMOs is that people who have

consumed GMOs since the mid 90s when they were first introduced have not experienced health

problems or death in a way that would make it seem that GMOs are unsafe(NPR).

When looking at the side who is all for GMOs it consists of scientists, organizations and

even politicians as well as many others just like the side that is against the use and consumption
 Sandlin 4

of GMOs. It is hard to find any scientists who are opposed to GMOs due to safety and health

concerns because science has pretty much proven that GMOs pose no risk to humans. However,

there was a scientist in 2013 by the name of Giles-Eric Seralini who published a study about rats

who consumed GMOs that ended up suffering from tumors. The findings of Seralini were even-

tually found to be false and he was forced to retract all of his work later in 2013(Alliance for Sci-

ence-Cornell). Since then there have still been various tests by scientists to see if GMOs are

harmful but there has yet to be a study that proves anything harmful being caused by GMOs

which is why almost all scientists agree that GMOs are safe to consume by humans. When look-

ing at organizations who are opposed to GMOs you can find a very long list. Every state has at

least one organization whose sole purpose is to fight against the use of GMOs in todays world.

In addition to local organizations against GMOs there are also many national ones. Some names

of these organizations are Ban GMOs Now, Food and Water Watch, Food Democracy

Now, Just Label it, and many more. Most of the groups I listed were all a part of the bill

passed by the government that required food companies to put that little GMO free or Con-

tains GMOs sticker on all of the food you see in a grocery store. GMOs in the eyes of our na-

tions politicians is almost a 50/50 argument. As anyone would expect, almost all democrats are

anti-GMO and almost all republicans are pro-GMO.

The Background of GMOs with Big Business and the Government

My interest in GMOs does not really lean towards the health or ethical side of the matter.

Instead I am greatly interested in the political and business side of the argument. It interests me

that many high ranking officials in positions of the FDA and the Agricultural Department have

close ties and relations with the huge corporations that created and produce GMOs today. Im
 Sandlin 5

sure Ive been eating foods that contain GMOs for my whole life and I am fine so far so that de-

bate doesnt have much value to me. Although, knowing that a majority of companies that make

GMOs used to be chemical corporations that provided The United States with chemicals such as

Agent Orange during the Vietnam War greatly interests me. If someone knows companies who

make GMOs are hiding dark and dirty secrets is more interesting than debating whether or not

food products containing GMOs should be labeled. I also do believe that the big business and po-

litical side of GMOs should not be a surprise to most people due to the country and day and age

we live in. There are plenty of things all across America that big businesses push only on order

to make a profit because thats how capitalism goes. However, this does not mean that the health

side of the debate should be ignored in any way.

GMOs and Health Risks

My main question that I had not yet answered when starting my research of GMOs was

whether or not they had any serious health risks on human beings. Over the last 20 plus years

that GMOs have been used in the foods consumed by Americans there has been countless

amounts of research done by various colleges and scientists all across the world. The main con-

clusion that was drawn from almost all of these studies was that GMOs pose no serious health

threat to humans. However, if you eat unhealthy foods all the time which most likely contain

GMOs you can develop health issues but it was found that eating unhealthy was not a direct re-

sult of the GMOs but instead simply eating too much artificial foods.

The Politics of GMOs

Just like most big businesses in America there are many ties to politics through politi-

cians and the laws that are passed to benefit these big businesses. One company in particular

takes almost all of the fire from the people against GMOs and thats Monsanto. Monsanto started
 Sandlin 6

off in the chemical business in the 1930s and helped develop everything from chemical weapons

to Round up and Sweet and Lo. Ever since Monsanto became the leader of the GMO market

there has been a revolving door between Monsanto and the judicial body that makes all the

rules and regulations around agriculture. Clarence Thomas who is a former attorney of Monsanto

and now a Supreme Court Justice wrote a majority of a bill that prevents farmers from saving the

seeds they buy from Monsanto and other companies which then forces farmers to go back to

these companies and continually buy more seeds as well as other products. Monsanto also had

very close political ties with the Bush and Clinton administrations. Politicians close to George

Bush received record donations from Monsanto and Robert Shapiro who was a former CEO of

Monsanto was a member of President Clintons advisory board. Monsanto is not the only large

food company closely involved with the politics and policies that run our country. Former North

Carolina Senator Wendell Murphy is part of the Smithfield board of directors. Margaret Miller

who was a chemical lab specialist at Monsanto is now a FDA branch chief. Linda Fisher who

was once the Vice President of public relations for Monsanto was also the EPA deputy adminis-

trator.

In Conclusion

GMOs are they key to feeding a growing population in America. Without GMOs it is a

simple fact that farmers could not produce enough food to feed everyone in America and even

today with GMOs there are still millions of Americans who go hungry each day. It is also clear

that GMOs are not as healthy as organic foods but as of right now they pose no serious health

risk to humans and allow the growing population to be fed and therefore people should be thank-

ful for the use of GMOs rather than scrutinize them. Whether you choose to consume GMOs or

not or feel they are unhealthy and need to be labeled on every package containing them only time
 Sandlin 7

will tell which side is right in the matter. Do you believe GMOs are the key to the worlds hunger

epidemic? Or do you believe they pose to great of a health risk? Either way you could be part of

the nations next step in the war over GMOs.

Works Cited

Appleton, Arthur. The Labeling of GMO Products Pursuant to International Trade Rules. New

York University Environmental Law Journal Vol. VIII-3, 2000 http://www.ecolomics-

international.org/biosa_appleton_labeling_gmo_products Accessed 18 October 2017

Charles, Dan GMOs Are Safe, But Dont Always Deliver On Promises, Top Scientists Say

Published 17 May 2016 www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/05/17/478415310/top-scien-

tists-say-gmos-are-safe-but-dont-always-deliver-on-promises Accessed 18 October 2017

 Sandlin 8

Freedman, David The Truth about Genetically Modified Food Published 1 September 2013

www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-truth-about-genetically-modified-food/ Accessed

18 October 2017

World, John. GMO Crops Dont Harm Human Health, Reports Say. Published 17 May 2016

time.com/4338702/gmo-human-health-safety-genetically-modified-crops/ Accessed 18

October 2017