Genetically modified organism: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

m

Line 188:

There is controversy over GMOs, especially with regard to their use in producing food. The dispute involves buyers, biotechnology companies, governmental regulators, non-governmental organizations, and scientists. The key areas of controversy related to [[genetically modified food|GMO food]] are whether GM food should be labeled, the role of government regulators, the effect of GM crops on health and the environment, the effect on pesticide resistance, the impact of GM crops for farmers, and the role of GM crops in feeding the world population.

There is broad [[scientific consensus]] that food on the market derived from GM crops poses no greater risk than conventional food.<ref name="The_Ecomomist_2014_May">{{citation|title=Vermont v science|url=http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21601831-little-state-could-kneecap-biotech-industry-vermont-v-science |work=The Economist |date=10 May 2014 |location=Montpelier |pages=25–26 |volume=411 |number=8886}}</ref><ref name="AAAS">American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Board of Directors (2012). "[http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2012/1025gm_statement.shtml Legally Mandating GM Food Labels Could Mislead and Falsely Alarm Consumers]"</ref><ref name="decade_of_EU-funded_GMO_research">{{cite book |title= A decade of EU-funded GMO research (2001–2010)|url= http://ec.europa.eu/research/biosociety/pdf/a_decade_of_eu-funded_gmo_research.pdf|format= PDF|year= 2010|publisher= Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Biotechnologies, Agriculture, Food. European Union|doi= 10.2777/97784|isbn= 978-92-79-16344-9|quote="The main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than 130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research, and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not per se more risky than e.g. conventional plant breeding technologies." (p. 16)}}</ref><ref name="Ronald">{{cite journal | author = Ronald, Pamela | title = Plant Geneticsgenetics, Sustainablesustainable Agricultureagriculture and Globalglobal Foodfood Securitysecurity | journal = Genetics | volume = 188 | issue = 1 | pages = 11–20 | year = 2011 | url=http://www.genetics.org/content/188/1/11.long | doi=10.1534/genetics.111.128553 | pmid=21546547 | pmc=3120150}}</ref> No reports of ill effects have been proven in the human population from ingesting GM food.<ref name="The_Ecomomist_2014_May" /><ref name="AMA">American Medical Association (2012). "[http://www.ama-assn.org/resources/doc/csaph/a12-csaph2-bioengineeredfoods.pdf Report 2 of the Council on Science and Public Health: Labeling of Bioengineered Foods]" "Bioengineered foods have been consumed for close to 20 years, and during that time, no overt consequences on human health have been reported and/or substantiated in the peer-reviewed literature." (first page)</ref><ref name=NRC2004>United States [[Institute of Medicine]] and [[United States National Research Council|National Research Council]] (2004). "Safety of Genetically Engineered Foods: Approaches to Assessing Unintended Health Effects". National Academies Press. [http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10977#toc Free full-text]. National Academies Press. pp R9-10: "In contrast to adverse health effects that have been associated with some traditional food production methods, similar serious health effects have not been identified as a result of genetic engineering techniques used in food production. This may be because developers of bioengineered organisms perform extensive compositional analyses to determine that each phenotype is desirable and to ensure that unintended changes have not occurred in key components of food."</ref><ref name="Key">{{cite journal | author = Key S, Ma JK, Drake PM | title = Genetically modified plants and human health | journal = J R Soc Med | volume = 101 | issue = 6 | pages = 290–8 |date=June 2008 | pmid = 18515776 | pmc = 2408621 | doi = 10.1258/jrsm.2008.070372|quote=pp 292-293. "Foods derived from GM crops have been consumed by hundreds of millions of people across the world for more than 15 years, with no reported ill effects (or legal cases related to human health), despite many of the consumers coming from that most litigious of countries, the USA."}}</ref> Although labeling of GMO products in the marketplace is required in many countries, it is not required in the United States and no distinction between marketed GMO and non-GMO foods is recognized by the US FDA. In a May 2014 article in [[The Economist]] it was argued that, while GM foods could potentially help feed 842 million malnourished people globally, laws such as those being considered by Vermont's governor, Peter Shumlin, to require labeling of foods containing genetically modified ingredients, could have the unintended consequence of interrupting the benign process of spreading GM technologies to impoverished countries that suffer with [[food security]] problems.<ref name="The_Ecomomist_2014_May" />

Opponents of genetically modified food such as the advocacy groups [[Organic Consumers Association]], the [[Union of Concerned Scientists]],<ref name="GristBegin">Nathanael Johnson for Grist. Jul 8, 2013 [http://grist.org/food/the-genetically-modified-food-debate-where-do-we-begin/ The genetically modified food debate: Where do we begin?]</ref><ref>JoAnna Wendel for the Genetic Literacy Project. 10 September 2013 [http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/09/10/223104/ Scientists, journalists and farmers join lively GMO forum]</ref><ref>Keith Kloor for Discover Magazine's CollideAScape 22 August 2014 [http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/collideascape/2014/08/22/gmos-double-standards-union-concerned-scientists/#.VGzlVvnF-rN On Double Standards and the Union of Concerned Scientists]</ref><ref>Union of Concerned Scientists. [http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/our-failing-food-system/genetic-engineering/alternatives-to-genetic.html#.VGznoPnF-rM Alternatives to Genetic Engineering]. Page source description: "Biotechnology companies produce genetically engineered crops to control insects and weeds and to manufacture pharmaceuticals and other chemicals. The Union of Concerned Scientists works to strengthen the federal oversight needed to prevent such products from contaminating our food supply."</ref><ref name=Marden>Emily Marden, [http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2236&context=bclr Risk and Regulation: U.S. Regulatory Policy on Genetically Modified Food and Agriculture] 44 B.C.L. Rev. 733 (2003). Quote: "By the late 1990s, public awareness of GM foods reached a critical level and a number of public interest groups emerged to focus on the issue. One of the early groups to focus on the issue was Mothers for Natural Law ("MFNL"), an Iowa based organization that aimed to ban GM foods from the market....The Union of Concerned Scientists ("UCS"), an alliance of 50,000 citizens and scientists, has been another prominent voice on the issue.... As the pace of GM products entering the market increased in the 1990s, UCS became a vocal critic of what it saw as the agency’s collusion with industry and failure to fully take account of allergenicity and other safety issues."</ref> and [[Greenpeace]] claim risks have not been adequately identified and managed, and they have questioned the objectivity of regulatory authorities. Some health groups say there are unanswered questions regarding the potential long-term impact on human health from food derived from GMOs, and propose mandatory labeling<ref name=BMA>[[British Medical Association]] Board of Science and Education (2004). "[http://www.argenbio.org/adc/uploads/pdf/bma.pdf Genetically modified food and health: A second interim statement]". March.</ref><ref name=PHAA>Public Health Association of Australia (2007) "[http://www.phaa.net.au/documents/policy/GMFood.pdf Genetically Modified Foods]" ''PHAA AGM'' 2007</ref> or a moratorium on such products.<ref name=CAPE>[[Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment]] (2013) "[http://cape.ca/capes-position-statement-on-gmos/ Statement on Genetically Modified Organisms in the Environment and the Marketplace]". October 2013</ref><ref name=IDEA>Irish Doctors' Environmental Association "[http://ideaireland.org/library/idea-position-on-genetically-modified-foods/ IDEA Position on Genetically Modified Foods]". Retrieved 3/25/14</ref><ref name=VDC>PR Newswire "[http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-releases/genetically-modified-maize-doctors-chamber-warns-of-unpredictable-results-to-humans-231410601.html Genetically Modified Maize: Doctors' Chamber Warns of 'Unpredictable Results' to Humans]". 11 November 2013</ref> Concerns include contamination of the non-genetically modified food supply,<ref name=CIEH>[[Chartered Institute of Environmental Health]] (2006) "[http://www.cieh.org/uploadedFiles/Core/Policy/CIEH_consultation_responses/Response_GM_final.pdf Proposals for managing the coexistence of GM, conventional and organic crops Response to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs consultation paper]". October 2006</ref> effects of GMOs on the environment and nature,<ref name=CAPE/><ref name=VDC/> the rigor of the regulatory process,<ref name=IDEA/><ref>[[American Medical Association]] (2012). "[http://www.ama-assn.org/resources/doc/csaph/a12-csaph2-bioengineeredfoods.pdf Report 2 of the Council on Science and Public Health: Labeling of Bioengineered Foods]". "To better detect potential harms of bioengineered foods, the Council believes that pre-market safety assessment should shift from a voluntary notification process to a mandatory requirement." page 7</ref> and consolidation of control of the food supply in companies that make and sell GMOs.<ref name=CAPE/>