GMO BASICS

Knowledge is power. Information is power. The secreting or hoarding of knowledge or information may be an act of tyranny camouflaged as humility. - Robin Morgan

Genetic engineering techniques are used by scientists to create GMOs. GMOs are genetically modified organisms whose genetic material has been changed with a certain purpose. To modify an organism genetically means either to insert or delete a gene. GMOs are used in medical and biological research, production of pharmaceutical drugs, and agriculture. The main difference between producing normal plant hybrids and GMOs is that normal plant hybrids are produced by cross pollination of closely related plants, and GMOs are created by splicing genes of completely unrelated species. Does the aim justify the means? Generally speaking, the aim is to increase resistance to pests, herbicides and environmental conditions. These statements would sound reasonable and altruistic if we were not witnesses of what is actually going on under the counter. GMO experiments and actual production of crops with GMOs have caused multileveled controversies, and not without a reason. The first and essential question is if this should be done at all from the ethical point of view, namely, do we have the right to interfere with natural processes without being able to predict the real consequences. Another problem is completely practical and it is the problem of safety of foods produced with GMOs, which affects all of us. Some products are labeled as containing GMO, and some are not.

Why is that important? Governments and food producers are convincing us that that GMOs are perfectly safe deliberately ignoring the fact that many independent studies have proved just the opposite that they pose a major threat to both human and animal health by producing serious unpredicted side-effects, but also damage crops, endanger food chain and contaminate the environment. That is why the opposition to GMOs has grown into a kind of a movement which has more and more supporters around the world. The main goal is to warn consumers of the dangers of eating such food and to inform them, because food producers and governments keep too many secrets from ordinary people, and count on their ignorance about these things. Frightening facts As it has already been mentioned, one of the purposes of creating GMOs is to increase tolerance to herbicides used in agriculture to destroy weeds. Those herbicides contain glyphosates which are highly toxic and as such pollute the soil and water, poison animals, cause sterility and birth defects, but also exterminate bees, which endangers food chain. Moreover, they worsen the condition of plants by demineralising the soil, while resistant weeds require more and more toxic substances. The end result is saturation of soil and plants with these poisonous substances. Another stumbling block is GMO contamination by wind or pollination carried from GMO farms to nonGMO fields, so even products which are considered non-GMO, might not be free from GMOs. Non -GMO Project an organisation that brings facts to light Fortunately, Non-GMO Project is trying to see to it that consumers are well informed about agricultural products that have a risk of being GMO. With this end in view, they have divided these products into two groups. In the first group there are those that are at high risk of

being GMO, and in the second group are those that have a monitored risk. Among those in the first group (high risk) are: alfalfa, canola, corn, cotton, papaya, soy, sugar beet, zucchini and yellow summer squash. Animal products such as meat, milk, eggs and honey are also listed among this high risk group due to contaminated feed. Last but not least, there are numerous ingredients derived from GMO risk crops contained in many processed foods, such as amino acids, aspartame, ascorbic acid, sodium ascorbate, vitamin C, citric acid, sodium citrate, ethanol, natural and artificial flavorings, high-fructose corn syrup, hydrolyzed vegetable protein, lactic acid, maltodextrins, molasses, monosodium glutamate, sucrose, textured vegetable protein (TVP), xanthan gum, vitamins, and yeast products. The second group are so-called monitored crops which are monitored either because there have already been contamination incidents, or because they have genetically modified relatives in commercial production where there is possibility of cross pollination. They are tested regularly to see if they should be moved to high risk category. They are Beta vulgaris (e.g., chard, table beets), Brassica napa (e.g., rutabaga, Siberian kale), Brassica rapa (e.g., bok choy, mizuna, Chinese cabbage, turnip, rapini, tatsoi), Curcubita (acorn squash, delicata squash, patty pan), flax, and rice. All that is labeled organic might not be organic As it has already been mentioned, some produce are labeled as being GMO, and some are not. To majority of people who look after their and their children's health, and who can afford to buy organic food it is reassuring to buy certified organic food. Despite higher prices, organic food sells well, but you would be unpleasantly surprised to find out that food which is certified as organic can actually be contaminated with GMO by wind or pollination from the nearby GMO farms, because there is no inspection for that type of contamination. Also, the way in which the product is grown is the

basis for organic certification, which does not guarantee that it is free from GMOs. These examples show that food safety regulations should be revised and made more rigorous if we as consumers want to be sure what is organic and what is not. Scientific evidence Unfortunately, most scientific studies about the influence of GMOs on health and environment presented to governments are funded either by industry or pro-biotech institutions, which makes data manipulation possible. A recent French study conducted by professor Gilles-Eric Sralini and his team raised serious concerns about the herbicide Roundup (the world's best-selling weedkiller) and the Roundup-ready corn (comprising 70% of the US grown corn, introduced by Monsanto in 1998). In that research, 10 groups of 10 rats were fed a diet containing either NK603 Roundup-resistant GM corn or were given water containing Roundup at levels permitted in drinking water over a two-year period. The research showed that the herbicide and the corn had severe impact on rats. Premature death (70% of females and 50% of males), and development of extremely large and fast-growing cancers, as well as multiple organ damage were the direct consequences of the feed. Sralini had to face strong opposition and violent criticism from a great number of his colleagues worldwide who found various flaws in his research methods. For those who strongly oppose GMO this massive and violent criticism is just a clear indicator of Monsanto conspiracy, and his fervent supporters among scientists are seen as mere string puppets. Although Sralini's trial and its results have been widely criticized, it managed to shake the very foundations of GMO technology and the regulation of GM crops.

Quod licet Iovi non licet bovi - Gods may do what cattle may not The obvious existence of a double standard for the political elite and general public can only give you another reason to have second thoughts about the safety of GMOs. Namely, the political establishment of the leading countries in the world shamelessly admit shifting to organic food while at the same time they officially approve of GMO and harmful substances for general consumption. Ordinary people are left without a choice, especially if they are misinformed by corrupt media and experts and if they trust their governments blindly. One of the best illustrations of China's food safety incidents, yet one of the most appalling was probably the 2008 contamination of milk by melamine which killed six babies and made 300,000 ill. The utmost irony can be spotted in a Monsanto's staff canteen where they serve only GMO-free soya and maize. All things considered, offical declarations concerning food safety on the part of food industry and governments should be regarded with a great amount of scepticism because that scepticism can be a lifesaver nowadays.