GMO’s: Throwing the Baby out with the Bathwater

by Daniel Brouse

The definition of GMO is the modern version, not selective breeding. (0)

GMO’s (genetically modified organism) have been around for thousands of years; however, the irrational fear of GMO’s is a recent phenomenon. Are there risks to GMO’s? Yes. Has there been any evidence of harm to human health? No. The risks associated with GMO’s are from the impact to our ecosystem through the misuse of GMO agricultural practices.

Technically speaking, you are a genetically modified organism.  One of the first patents issued for GMO’s was for medicine. “In 1982, The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approves the first genetically engineered drug, Genentech’s Humulin, a form of human insulin produced by bacteria. This is the first consumer product developed through modern bioengineering.”

The phobia of GMO’s is really a fear of modern bioengineering patents. Modern bioengineering started in 1980. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that “genetically altered life forms can be patented. The decision allowed the Exxon Oil Company to patent an oil-eating microorganism.” (1)

Another change in the meaning of GMO occurred with the sequencing of genes. “NHGRI led the National Institutes of Health’s contribution to the International Human Genome Project. This project, which had as its primary goal the sequencing of the three thousand million base pairs that make up human genome, was successfully completed in April 2003.” (1.1) With these discoveries all sorts-of risks arose. There are the benefits of being able to use plants similar to the human genome for research. For instance, GMO tobacco plants are being used to help develop new medicines because of their similarity to the human genome. It is the ability of Man to alter genetics so rapidly that is frightening.

SHOULD WE BE AFRAID OF GMO’s?
The use of GMO’s in agriculture practices should be of concern. “There is a case for GMOs and a case against the indiscriminate use of monoculture crops fueled by synthetic fertilizer on dead lands.” (2)

Part of the concern is a monoculture crop. There may be long term impacts from the lack of diversity caused by patent controlled crops. This factor is the least concerning since patents are only good for 17 years. After that, the GMO seed is free to crossbreed.

Of more concern is, “fueled by synthetic fertilizer on dead lands.” The inherent risk from GMO’s is not the plant itself, but how the plant is farmed. Some GMO crops promote the use of RoundUp (glyphosate). RoundUp creates dead lands — the rest of the ecosystem is destroyed, at least to some extent. Certainly, all the other vegetation is extinct from that land. The collapse of bee colonies may, or may not, be part of that destroyed ecosystem. Combining RoundUp with synthetic fertilizer just adds fuel to the deadly mix.  There appears to be no debate that GMO seed created for the purpose of being fed fossil fuel fertilizer has a negative impact on the entire world.

5,000 years ago in China similar agriculture experiments were conducted. (In particular, the cultivation of rice.) Today it is believed these methods of farming are the origins of human induced climate change. (3)

If you look at the impact on Earth as an ecosystem, humans are conducting a deadly agriculture experiment.

PART II: Should we throw the baby out with the bathwater?

On the other hand, GMO farming (in particular, the cultivation of rice) is saving millions of children from dying or going blind. (4)

HUMAN HEALTH
Since 1992, millions of animals have been raised on GMO feed. Since 1996, cows, chickens, pigs and pretty much all other types of livestock have eaten GMO crops. To date, there has not been a single case of a health problem for either the animals nor the humans that consume the meat. This equates to multiple generations being raised without an occurrence of ill health.

Also since 1996, almost all organic produce has been grown using GMO fed manure. During these multiple generations of plants, neither a plant nor human has shown any ill effects related to the GMO dung.

… TO BE CONTINUED.

0) Mark Mullen (2016)
1) American Public Radio (2016)
1.1) Human Genome Project (2003)
2) Sidd (2016)
3) Richard Lovett (2014)
4} Golden Rice / U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (2015)

This entry was posted in Agriculture, Business, children, Education, Environment, health and wellness, Science and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • Categories

  • Archives

Created by: Daniel Brouse and Sidd
All text, sights and sounds © BROUSE
"You must not steal nor lie nor defraud."