Are you smarter than a mouse?

A farmer left two bags of corn in a workroom, one GMO and one non-GMO.  Mice broke into both bags; they quickly stopped eating the GMO corn after only a few bites.  “They just took a nibble from one of the kernels of this and never came back to eat it,” said Jeffrey M. Smith,  “they devoured the non-GMO corn.”  Smith is founder of the Institute for Responsible Technology (https://www.responsibletechnology.org) and the author of two books about genetically modified foods, Seeds of Deception (Yes! Books, 2003) and Genetic Roulette (Yes! Books, 2007).  Full disclosure, Smith is a prominent anti-GMO activist.  According to Smith, a multitude of animals have been observed avoiding GMO corn: chickens, geese, squirrels, deer, raccoons, and of course, mice and rats.

On the other hand, proponents of GMO foods herald its benefits … higher yields from fewer inputs, including less water, and in harsher environments, plant insect and disease resistance, and in some cases better taste and higher nutrition.

Who do we trust; the mice (assuming the story is true) or the proponents of genetic modification of plants and animals (assuming their assertions are true)?  The fierce vociferous GMO versus non-GMO debate rages on and is likely to continue …

Ok, my choice of title for this post is intentionally provocative, as is starting with the story of the mice.  But, what does the data show?  Can we trust the data?

Humans have been modifying animals and food crops for thousands of years using traditional methods like selective breeding and cross-breeding to breed plants and animals with more desirable traits.  For example, today’s strawberries are a cross between species native to both North and South America.  Corn was one of humankind’s earliest food innovations.  It was domesticated about 10,000 years ago when humans learned to cross-pollinate plants; a scraggy, nondescript grass called teosinte turned into the modern corn of today.

Historically, plant breeding was constrained to sexually compatible plants, which through generations resulted in unique varieties.  Today’s global crop staples, corn, rice and wheat are the prodigy of such techniques.  Over generations natural mutants often revealed desirable traits.  Some considered Mother Nature’s process too slow; scientists turned to chemicals and irradiation to speed the creation of mutants that could demonstrate desirable traits.  Laboratory techniques were developed for sexually incompatible cross-breeding, furthering the search for desirable hereditary traits.  With advances in genetic engineering, the process of identifying desirable plant traits and bringing them to fruition accelerated.  Genetically modified (GM) crops have been widely adopted globally.  They are more often termed “GMO,” genetically modified organisms, specifically to mean the plant’s genome has been laboratory engineered to express desirable traits such as resistance to pests or disease, or simply a more desirable color, and everything in between.

The focus of the above chart is food safety, not nutrition.  There is no consistent, or accepted, definition of “food safety,” and this term appears to have different meanings among the public and even among food safety professionals.  The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) defines “food safety” as “the conditions and practice that preserve food quality to prevent contamination and food-borne illnesses.”  Thus, food may be “safe” to eat, but there is no requirement that it be nutritious or “good for you.”

Today, there are ten GMO crops produced in the US.  More than 90 percent of corn, soybean, cotton, canola and sugar beet acreage in the US is GMO.  There are about 95 million acres of corn and 80-85 million acres of soybeans grown in the US annually.  GMO corn starch and soybean lecithin are two ingredients found in seventy percent of processed foods.  Most of the GMO crops grown in the United States are used for animal food.  You eat the GMO crops by eating the meat of those animals.  https://short-facts.com/how-many-genetically-modified-crops-are-grown-in-the-united-states/

What are the benefit claims of GMO foods?

The primary advantage of GMO foods is that crop yields become more consistent and productive, in general, they are hardier.  The primary focus of early genetic modification of crops was to develop or increase resistance to bacteria, diseases, herbicides, pests, and insects.  Some crop plants have been genetically engineered to produce a chemical that is toxic to certain pests such as fungi or insects but harmless to humans or animals [Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt)].  Bt corn and cotton are today widespread.  The aim of making plants more resistant to herbicides is to allow farmers to safely kill weeds without harming the crop.  Roundup is the brand name of a systemic, broad-spectrum glyphosate-based herbicide.  Crops that have been genetically modified for use of Roundup include corn, soybeans, maize, canola, sugar beets, cotton, and alfalfa; 87 percent of US soybean fields are planted with glyphosate resistant varieties.  Many crops have been genetically modified to produce a denser nutrient profile along with higher yields under specific environmental conditions.  Interestingly, Roundup is often sprayed on crops, especially wheat, just before harvesting as a drying agent and to increase the yield.  A specific concern with glyphosate is it’s “a poison like no other, toxic to the gut all the way up to the brain.”  D. Perlmutter, Grain Brain (Little, Brown Spark, 2013, 2018), p. 257.

More recent genetic modifications have focused on other attributes and characteristics such as making them less likely to spoil in storage, while being transported to markets, or on the shelf.  Plants are being engineered to produce pharmaceutical products such as vaccines and proteins.  Plant colors are being altered to be brighter; brighter foods are associated with better nutrition and improved flavors.  For example, deeper red colors make food seem sweeter, even if not in actuality.

As is true throughout all of life, you cannot get something for nothing, and there are often side effects.  To quote Milton Friedman, “there is no such thing as a free lunch.”  Numbers of concerns have been raised about genetically modified foods, such as: pests developing resistance to genetically introduced toxins; those toxins affecting or killing non-target organisms; introducing new allergenic proteins; weeds developing resistance to pesticides creating “super weeds;” genetically modified crops cross-breeding with conventional counterparts that are used in food production; and more.

Understand that the commercial purpose of genetic modification is not to improve crops, improve farming, or feed the world.  GMO exists to gain intellectual property over seeds and plant breeding, and drive agriculture to the benefit of the giant agribusinesses.  “The Big 6 (Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta, Dow, Bayer, and BASF) have consolidated into a Big 4 dominated by Bayer and Corteva (a new firm created as a result of the Dow–DuPont merger), and rounded out with ChemChina (which acquired Syngenta) and BASF. These four firms control more than 60 percent of global proprietary seed sales.”  US farmers have seen seed costs quadruple and seed choices narrow since the introduction of GMO seeds.  https://civileats.com/2019/01/11/the-sobering-details-behind-the-latest-seed-monopoly-chart/; https://nutritionstudies.org/gmo-dangers-facts-you-need-to-know/

Beginning in 2004 the European Union implemented new rules for labeling of GMO food and animal feed.  The EU GM Food and Feed Regulation rules cover all GMO food and animal feed with the presence of any genetically modified material in the final product.  This means products such as flour, oils and glucose syrups have to be labeled as GMO if they are from a GMO source.  Products produced using GMO technology do not have to be labeled; for example, cheese produced with GMO enzymes.  Food products from animals fed GMO feed to not have to be labeled.

Some countries have outright banned genetically modified foods: in the EU, France, Germany, Austria, Greece, Hungary, the Netherlands, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Bulgaria, Poland, Denmark, Malta, Slovenia, Italy, and Croatia.  In Africa, Algeria and Madagascar; in Asia, Turkey, Kyrgyzstan, Bhutan, and Saudi Arabia.  In the Americas, Belize, Ecuador, Peru and Venezuela.  https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-that-ban-gmos

As of January 1, 2022, food producers must comply with the U.S. Department of Agriculture established federal standard for labeling genetically modified foods with the words "bioengineered" or "derived from bioengineered.  Previous labels that said “genetically engineered” (GE) or “genetically modified organisms” (GMOs) will no longer be used, although consumers may be more familiar with these existing terms.  The USDA defines bioengineered foods as containing "detectable genetic material that has been modified through certain laboratory techniques and cannot be created through conventional breeding or found in nature.”  https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/be

 The Standard provides four methods of disclosure: (i) the statement “Bioengineered food” or “Contains a bioengineered food ingredient” (hereinafter “text disclosure”); (ii) the USDA BE symbol (the “symbol disclosure”); (iii) an electronic or quick response (QR) digital disclosure link and accompanying text (“electronic disclosure”); and (iv) text message instructions (“text message disclosure”). The law requires that the electronic disclosure be accompanied by a phone number for consumers to access an automated recording available 24-hours a day with the necessary BE disclosure information.  After a lawsuit was filed against the USDA, the USDA removed the QR code and text message options leaving only the text and symbol.

As you should reasonably expect, the Big-Ag and bio-GMO companies lobbied hard against any required labeling.  The pivotal enactment was the signing of a federal law in 2018 that denied the states the authority to require labeling of GMO food.  Monsanto lobbied Congress to include amendments, or “Monsanto Riders,” to the 2013 Farm Bill that would prohibit states from requiring labels on any genetically engineered (GE) foods.  “On July 29, 2016, President Barack Obama quietly signed into law legislation that prevents states from requiring on-package labeling of genetically modified ingredients, capping an historic win for farm groups, food companies and the biotech industry.”  https://www.agri-pulse.com/articles/7322-obama-signs-historic-gmo-labeling-bill

The USDA labeling standard was created at the direction of the law outlawing GMO labeling.  All bioengineered means GMO, but all GMOs do not necessarily fall under the bioengineered label.  Almost 80 percent of conventional processed food comes under GMO; the “Bioengineered” label narrows down the definition of food products.  Food products made using new GMO techniques like CRISPR, a technology to edit genes, are untestable and the law focuses only on those items containing detectable modified genetic material in the final product.  Heavily processed food like sugar, oil, and packaged goods containing these ingredients falls outside the bioengineered required disclosure.  Bioengineered labeling excluded food products made for livestock; it only considers food directly intended for human consumption.  "These regulations are not about informing the public but rather designed to allow corporations to hide their use of genetically engineered ingredients from their customers," stated Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety. "It is a regulatory scam ….”  https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/press-releases/6541/facing-ongoing-litigation-challenge-federal-gmo-food-labeling-regulations-to-go-into-effect-on-january-1

The new Federal standard does not affect companies that heretofore labeled their products non-GMO from continuing to do so.  Keep in mind that a non-GMO product does not necessarily mean it is organic; products that are both non-GMO and organic show both labels.

What’s a consumer to do?

The most fundamental complaint from those concerned about the health risks of GMO foods, not just the “Bioengineered” ones, is virtually none of the research on health effects is independent.  Big-Ag either conducts or pays for research studies, and then picks the ones that are submitted to the government (USDA, FDA, EPA).  "The scandal is that the USDA does not force the companies to give results of trials that had negative outcomes," says Harwood Schaffer, PhD, a research assistant professor at the University of Tennessee's Agricultural Policy Analysis Center.  "We've seen this in medicine: You only get the data that the [industry] wants you to see."  Schaffer also points out that the biotech firms consider their research proprietary, so there's no record for the public to inspect: "Maybe the GMO companies aren't hiding anything, but the question is: Does the public have the right to know?"  https://www.elle.com/beauty/health-fitness/advice/a12574/allergy-to-genetically-modified-corn/

A simple Web search about reasons to not eat GMO foods will provide prodigious reading material; so will a search about the safety of GMO foods.  There are data (trustworthy ???) and opinions on both sides of the issue. 

We are most persuaded by the large number reports of disease mitigation or cure from eliminating GMO foods to the fullest extent possible.  For example, see Caitlin Shetterly’s story on elle.com at https://www.elle.com/beauty/health-fitness/advice/a12574/allergy-to-genetically-modified-corn/.  See, What's Making Our Children Sick?: How Industrial Food Is Causing an Epidemic of Chronic Illness, and What Parents (and Doctors) Can Do About It, by Michelle Perro, MD, and Vincanne Adams, PhD, for stories about curing children from conditions that baffle traditional medicine by removing GMO foods from their diets.  Look at Mind Over Medicine - Revised Edition: Scientific Proof That You Can Heal Yourself, by Lissa Rankin, MD, for a physician’s personal story about abandoning GMO foods.  A study was undertaken to see if correlations existed between the rise of GMO crops, associated glyphosate use and the rise in chronic disease in the US.  While it is acknowledged that correlation is not causation, the study states, “. . .we have data for 22 diseases, all with a high degree of correlation and very high significance.”  Swanson, N., A. Leu, J. Abrahamson, and Wallet, B., “Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate and the deterioration of health in the United States of America,” J. Organic Sys., 9:6-37 (2014).

It is your body, your health, your choice.