The scientific evidence regarding the health impacts of genetic engineering is still evolving. While 87% of the scientists claim that the genetically engineered(GE) foods are safe for, human consumption, only37% of the general public have adopted the technology. This piece of work will discuss the current state of scientific findings on the possible health risks associated with genetically modified food. The scientific evidence presented relies majorly on the current report from the International Council for Science (ICSU). The report draws on some 50 scientific assessments carried out in different countries by organizations such as World Health Organization, the European Commission, and the National Science Academies in different countries.

There is a substantial degree of consensus regarding the transgenic products, but scientists differ in some issues, and gaps in knowledge still remain. Currently, available transgenic crops and the foods derived from them have been declared safe to consume and the methods used to test their safety have also been deemed appropriate. These conclusions are based on the scientific evidence as presented by ICSU and they are in agreement with the views of the World Health Organization. To date, no verifiable adverse effects resulting from the consumption of genetically modified foods(GMF0have been reported anywhere in the world. Scientists generally agree that genetically modified foods can offer bothdirect and indirect benefits to consumers. Some of the direct benefits will be improved the nutritional quality of foods, which has substantial amounts of beta-carotene (Verma, Nanda, Singh, Singh, & Mishra 2011, p. 4).

On the same note, Monsanto has produced soybeans with a lot of the heart-healthy omega-3 fatty acids. The GE foods will also reduce the presence of poisonous compoundssuch cyanide present in cassava. The use of the GMF is also anticipated to reduce allergens in certain foods such as those found in groundnuts and cassava. Some of the indirect health benefits will come from the reduced pesticide use, which will reduce the occurrence of mycotoxins caused by insect or disease damage(Smyth, 2012, p. 118). There will also be increased affordable food coupled with the removal of toxic compounds from the soil. The general scientific consensus is that genetically modified crops pose no greater threat than the conventional food. One of the articles which appeared in the oxford journalargued that human beings consume an average of 0.1 to 1gram of DNA in their diet daily. Therefore, the author argued that the transgene present in the genetically modified foods is not a totally new kind of material in the digestive system of the human beings, and that it is present in very small quantities. For, example, in the transgenic corn, the transgenes present only represent about 0.00001% of the total DNA.

Research has shown that dietary DNA has no direct toxicity in itself. On the contrary, research has shown that exogenous nucleotides play acrucial role in proper functioning of the gut and the immune system. Likewise, there is no substantial evidence of the possibility that plant-derived DNA can be incorporated and expressed into the genomes of the consuming organism. The defense processes that involves the extensive breakdown of DNA during digestion, the elimination of the integrated foreign DNA from the host genome and thereafter silencing the foreign gene expression by the targeted DNA methylation, helps to prevent the incorporation or the expression of the foreign DNA (Ekici& Sancak,2011, p. 2). In May 2000, a report was presented by the National Academy of Sciences which showed that there was no transgenic modification inherently harmful. Additionally, in a literature review which appeared in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry revealed that, genetically modified food production disrupts to a limited extent the composition of crops compared with the traditional breeding, which is believed to have tremendous history of safety. We also note that food from genetically modified plants has to satisfy the same requirements, including the safety requirements, just like the foods from traditionally bred plants.

A consultation mechanism has been put in place by FDA, which encourages the developers of the genetically engineered plants to make consultations with FDA before marketing their products. This process ensures that all the genetically modified products that reach the market are lawful and safe for consumption. The purpose of the consultation process is to ensure that the safety and regulatory issues concerning the product are resolved prior to commercial distribution. The European Union has taken an even much stricter regulation on GM development. In this regard, the council on foreign relations requires that any applicant wishing to conduct field tests of GMO’s to make an application and also submit the environmental risk assessment to the authorities of the country where the testing will occur. The EU member states are also allowed to restrict or even ban the use or sale of a productif it has a justifiable reason that the product poses a risk to human health or the environment. The evaluation process of the level of safety of food from the genetically modified plants is very comprehensive.

Opponents of the GM crops have time and againquestioned the objectivity of the government’s regulationsin regards to the consultation process aswell as the intensity of the testing. However, we note that the evaluation process is very comprehensive. Generally, the developer establishes the distinguishing attributes of the new genetic traits and evaluates whether any new material that the person will consume in food derived from the genetically modified plant could be poisonous or allergic(Verma et al., 2011, p. 3). The developer is also required to compare the percentage of nutrients in the new GM plant to a similar traditionally bred plant. These will include such nutrients like fiber, proteins, fat, and the minerals. The developer then includes this report in a safety assessment, which is then submitted to FDA’s Biotechnology Evaluation Team for further scrutiny for safety and compliance with the law. It is interesting to note that, in spite of Europeans public distrust ofgenetically modified foods, the EU as part of its Europe 2020 initiative, spent several years coupled with hundreds of millions of Euro,investigating about the safety and safety of GMO products and found the products posed no threats to its citizens. This includes both direct consumption, their use in processed foods and as a livestock feed.Dr. Steven Novella, who is aneurologist at Yale University, told Mother Jones that the reviews have concluded universallythat there is just no health risk. In conclusion, we can say that GM is not the panacea, nor is it a threat.it can be looked at as one more tool which has to be used very diligently. In short, it can be compared to the nuclear energy that powers cities, but can also be used to demolish the same cities. Hence, we conclude that genetic modification can be immensely valuable and also highly detrimental to the society, depending on how we use it. A recent survey from the Pew Foundationrevealed that more than 90% of the scientists in America are convinced that GM food is generally safe. Pamela Ronald, who runs the University of California’slab for Crop Genetics innovation, says that there should be no alarm in regard to GM food since everything that humans eat has actually been genetically modified in some way. She gives an example of our ancestors who used the corn mutants and crossed them to develop different types of corn varieties so that they could harvest them better. She supports her argument from the fact that insulin was one of the first genetically engineered medicine, which is widely accepted because of the significance if has to the diabetics. Hence, according to Ronald, GM foods have been in use since time immemorial, with no adverse effects reported, and hence they should not be a source of alarm.

In addition, we also note that after four decades of commercial use in medicine, cheeses, wine, and plants and after about 20 years of careful research and intensive peer review many independent scientists not funded by the major corporations, all the major scientific organization in the world has come to a conclusion that, the genetically engineered crops currently in the market are safe to consume. Hence, we seethat the current opposition to GM foods is non-science based.

The lack of evidence of any adverse effects, however, does not imply that the new transgenic foods ate without risk. Scientists acknowledge that the long- term effects of these foods are still not clear. The major safety concerns associated with genetically modified foods is related to the possibility of increased allergens, toxins, horizontal gene transfer and other unintended effects. Gene technology may raise or lower the levels of naturally occurring proteins, toxins or the other harmful compounds in foods. The other food safety concern is the fearof horizontal gene transfer and the possible antibiotic resistance. The basis of this argument is the fact that the first generation GM crops were developed from antibiotic-resistant marker genes. If by any chance these genes are transferred from the food product into the body cells or the bacteria in the intestinal tract,it could lead to development of a strain of bacteria resistant to antibiotics, which will result to adverse health effects(Chaudhry, Watkins, & Castle, 2010, p. 12). Additionally, in a study published in a 2012 issue of Food and Chemical Toxicology, it was suggested that there exists possible relationshipbetween the consumption of Bt corn and the tumor growth in lab rats but has since been annulled.

In addition, a research conducted by the International Journal of Biological Sciences,revealed that when rats consumed GE corn for a period of 90 days, they developed deteriorations in the functioning of the liver and the kidney. In another study, it was found that there were considerable irregularities in the functioning of the livers, which suggested an increased metabolic rate resulting from the GE diet. Furthermore, a 2007 study found considerable impairments in both the kidney and the liver in the rats fed on Bt corn which was insect resistant. This suggests that the available data is not sufficient to conclude that GE corn is safe for consumption. Another research on mouse embryos also revealed that when mice were fed on GE soybeans had abnormal embryonic development. Another research conducted by the Italian researchers found that GE livestock feed had the possibility of impacting negatively on the consumers of animal products. The researchers discovered some biotech genes in the milk of cows fed using genetically modified feeds, which suggested the possibility that the transgenes are able to survive the high temperatures used to pasteurize milk.

From the above discussion, if we comparethe views presented by the authors of the academic sources to theviews of the popular media sources,we can clearly see that the popular media sources uses less technical terms when discussing the issues revolving around genetically modified foods. We can also see that the media sources give almost equal weights to both the possible positive and negative impacts that these foods can have on the impacts of the consumers. Additionally, the media sources are quick to mention the various demonstrations that have arisen from the general public in objection of the use of genetically modified foods. It is also interesting to note that most of the media sources, do not give a conclusive verdict on their stand regarding the genetically modified foods. This neutral stand,in my view, is crucial in that the consumers are left to make independent decisions, on whether to use the GM foods or not, without being influenced by the media In their decision making process, because most citizens are known to trust the media more than any other source.On the other hand, we see that most of the scholarly articles use technical language and many scientific terms to describe the scientific view regarding the effects of genetically modified foods. The sources also incline more on the positive consequences of the genetically modified foods and put little emphasis on the possible adverse effects of the foods. We also see that where the academic sources touchon the adverse effects of genetically engineered foods, they claim that there is no scientific backing to support the claim.

From the discussion above, I can conclude that this topic is closely related to the theories learned in class, moreso on food security and science and technology. I have gotten more insight into these topics, more so on the current scientific stand on the health effects of genetically modified food and the need to adopt the technology to solve the problem of food shortage. With this knowledge, I can now confidently take a position on whether the genetically modified food ought to be embraced or not. I am now also in the position to educate the society, more so the people who rely on unfounded rumors that genetically modified food can be injurious to their health.

Conclusion

Fromthe discussion above, we see that several concerns have been raised on the health impact of the genetically modified foods on the consumer. Although some adverse effects have been discovered in animals, such as pigs and mice when fed on GM feed, to date, no such effect has been reported in humans. Therefore, we conclude that, to date, there is no scientific evidence that the genetically modified foods can have adverse effects on the health of the consumers.

References

BBC. (2015, June 3). Is opposition to genetically modified food irrational? – BBC News. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-32901834

Economist. (2013, November 7). Genetically modified food: After Washington | The Economist. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2013/11/genetically-modified-food

Wall street journal. (2014, August 7). The GMO Fight Ripples Down the Food Chain – WSJ. Retrieved from http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-gmo-fight-ripples-down-the-food-chain-1407465378

Youtube. (2015, March 19). Are Genetically Modified Foods Safe to Eat? (Science of Genetic Engineering)[Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNOurq0lM0M

Verma, C., Nanda, S., Singh, R. K., Singh, R. B., & Mishra, S. (2011). A review on impacts of genetically modified food on human health.The Open Nutraceuticals Journal, 4, 3-11.

Ekici, K., &Sancak, Y. C. (2011).A perspective on genetically modified food crops.African Journal of Agricultural Research, 6(7), 1639-1642.

Chaudhry, Q. A. S. I. M., Watkins, R. I. C. H. A. R. D., & Castle, L. A. U. R. E. N. C. E. (2010). Nanotechnologies in the food arena: new opportunities, new questions, new concerns. Nanotechnologies in Food. The Royal Society of Chemistry, 1-17.

Smyth, S. (2012). Innovation and liability in biotechnology: transnational and comparative perspectives. JRC SCIENTIFIC AND POLICY REPORTS, 101.

CLICK BUTTON TO ORDER NOW