The issue of GMO foods being safe or ethical is a big debate. Is it the health hazard many of us are concerned that it is? Only one way to know. Review the research and ethical questions regarding the labeling of GMO foods. One of the first questions is what research has been done? What is the history of GMO’s? Why is Monsanto so concerned about consumers having the right to know whether the food they buy is or isn’t genetically modified? Many more questions come to mind. Be sure to watch the documentary Genetic Roulette: The Gamble of Our Lives. In the mean time enjoy the scientifically relevant information.
If approximately 38 countries (Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, China, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Greenland, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan and the United Kingdom) have already enforced labeling of GMO ingredients in foods, why has America stood by Monsanto on not making it mandatory? Has the FDA simply not reviewed the scientific data demonstrating deleterious side-effects from consuming genetically modified food? Is there really substantial evidence indicating safety concerns?
Let’s review some of the safety assurance studies done. The following one is actually rather self-assuring, and it is followed up by another one that eases the mind that GMO food might indeed be safe . . .
- The current study presents the results of a 13 week feeding study in rats with grain from Roundup Ready corn which is tolerant to the herbicide glyphosate. Herbicide tolerance was accomplished through the introduction of cp4 epsps coding sequences into the corn genome for in planta production of CP4 EPSPS enzymes . . . There were 400 rats in the study divided into 10 groups of 20 rats/sex/group. Overall health, body weight, food consumption, clinical pathology parameters (hematology, blood chemistry, urinalysis), organ weights, gross and microscopic appearance of tissues were comparable between groups fed diets containing Roundup Ready and control corn grain. This study complements extensive agronomic, compositional and farm animal feeding studies with Roundup Ready corn grain, confirming it is as safe and nutritious as existing commercial corn hybrids. (full abstract)
This is another study demonstrating a positive safety evaluation of GMO food ingestion by mammals . . . but something doesn’t feel right does it? Keep reading to find out why it smells fishy.
- The results of a 90-day rat feeding study with grain from MON 810 corn (YieldGard Cornborer — YieldGard Cornborer is a registered trademark of Monsanto Technology, LLC) that is protected against feeding damage from corn and stalk boring lepidopteran insects are presented . . . There were a total of 400 rats in the study divided into 10 groups of 20 rats/sex/group. The responses of rats fed diets containing MON 810 were compared to those of rats fed grain from conventional corn varieties. Overall health, body weight, food consumption, clinical pathology parameters (hematology, blood chemistry, urinalysis), organ weights, and gross and microscopic appearance of tissues were comparable between groups fed diets containing MON 810 and conventional corn varieties. This study complements extensive agronomic, compositional and farm animal feeding studies with MON 810 grain, confirming that it is as safe and nutritious as grain from existing commercial corn varieties. (full abstract)
The important thing to notate here is that the company who funded those two research studies is none other than . . . you guessed it, Monsanto. Could that present a conflict of interest? It would seem to be a plausible assessment of the concerns of insider research, a common trend in social engineering altogether. He who controls the research and publication of the research, controls a powerful market to social engineer the public. What about the research that indicates safety concerns? Keep reading to learn more.
This is a very long scientific journal for GMO food safety concerns. It is a rather conservative and fair reporting on potential, and in some cases clear toxicity issues found in animal studies. It warrants further research to be done and gives more reason that GMO food should, at the bare minimum, have required enforced labeling in the US.
- We therefore conclude that our data strongly suggests that these GM maize varieties induce a state of hepatorenal (liver/kidney) toxicity. This can be due to the new pesticides (herbicide or insecticide) present specifically in each type of GM maize, although unintended metabolic effects due to the mutagenic properties of the GM transformation process cannot be excluded  . . . Our analysis highlights that the kidneys and liver as particularly important on which to focus such research as there was a clear negative impact on the function of these organs in rats consuming GM maize varieties for just 90 days. (full journal)
The Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology at the University of Athens, Medical School within Greece summarized potential concerns back in February of 2009, as can be found within the US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health.
- As genetically modified (GM) foods are starting to intrude in our diet concerns have been expressed regarding GM food safety. These concerns as well as the limitations of the procedures followed in the evaluation of their safety are presented. Animal toxicity studies with certain GM foods have shown that they may toxically affect several organs and systems . . . The results of most studies with GM foods indicate that they may cause some common toxic effects such as hepatic, pancreatic, renal, or reproductive effects and may alter the hematological, biochemical, and immunologic parameters. However, many years of research with animals and clinical trials are required for this assessment. The use of recombinant GH or its expression in animals should be re-examined since it has been shown that it increases IGF-1 which may promote cancer. (full abstract)
This is more of an investigative series of articles and due to time constraints it is difficult to say how many parts will exist. So, check back to enlighten yourself on the potential threat of GMOs on your body. This data should be taken as preliminary data, as these are not human studies. However just because it is preliminary data, it does not make it less relevant or less worthy of further investigation. The next article displays health concerns ranging from liver, kidney and digestive tract health concerns. Review the data and remember that all evidence is suggestive. This is a great resource for Non-GMO information. To the Boise/Idaho readers, visit this page to learn more on what you can do today to make a more informed decision at the grocery store.
The following is more food for your mind. Because ending with quotes is like ending with a bucket of awesome. Here is one from our comrade Aryeh Frimer.
“I’d rather live with a good question than a bad answer.”