Health risks of GMOs

Introduction

The world population is bulging. Every government and food agency in the world is in a rush to come up with ways to feed the population. This is further complicated by the fact the world population increases geometrically, whereas food production increases arithmetically.True, considerable efforts made towards population control methods such as the Chinese one child policy and family planning are paying off. Despite this, increased global warming has brought diverse climatic changes and increased desertification. The environment, is not the same. Nature cannot be relied upon to satisfactory feed the world’s population. This has led to increased scientific research in Agriculture. Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)[1] are being developed by the day(Anne & Terje 65-74). These plants and livestock species, not only grow faster, but are also bigger in terms of weight for animals, and produce for plants. Through GMO research the bid for food security is being realized. Nonetheless, scientists more so in the field of medicine are raising concerns regarding the health risks posed by these GMOs.

Background

            GMO became prevalent during the close of the 20^th Century. Back then, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) claimed that they had no evidence towards any potential health risks in GMOs. Due to this, GMOs were classified alongside conventionally bred foods and passed for the public’s consumption. No preliminary studies or investigations were carried out as the Food and Drug Administration did not require for them to be done. The public accepted this assurance. However, a lawsuit filed later showed evidence to the contrary. The quality assurance was more out of political and corporate machinations rather than scientific back-up. Scientists had repeatedly called for long-term studies and repeatedly warned of potential health hazards. This was largely ignored, to the detriment of the public’s health (Boholm 12).

The Health Risks of GMOs

The mechanisms and modes for Genetic modification is fundamentally different from the conventional farming practices. Unlike simple science that back agricultural practices, such as crossbreeding and grafting, genetic modification involves altering the very genetic  composition of the organism in question. This involves deep science, which at times goes contrary to expectation, or brings unplanned for side effects. To illustrate this, scientists have been known to shoot genes into cells before they are transferred to the organism. This gene insertion is known to bring mutations and genetic restructuring of the whole organism in question. The effect of this is that they very fundamental basis by which the specific organism is based on, and for which it is grown, shifts radically. This brings unintended effects to the organism (Boholm 12). Sadly, some of these effects are passed to humans when they consume the organism. This has led to numerous countries placing bans in GMO foods and accompanied pesticides and farm inputs. In truth, even though GMOs are widely accepted, they have not been exhaustively researched on for any government to give a guaranteed assurance concerning hem.

The major concerns against GMOs are:

GMOs are unhealthy

According to studies conducted by The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM), animal subject subjected to GMOs had catastrophic health issues such as, immune system disorders, infertility, liver problems and accelerated aging. In fact, the results of the study were so alarming that doctors were urged to advise their patients and the public in general on genetically modified foods. Some of the bacteria introduced during genetic engineering, can be passed to humans. (Seralini 438-443)  An example is the GM bovine growth hormone for accelerating growth. This is introduced in animal breeds in order to speed up their growth rates and body mass. This is passed to humans. This has been cited as a cause for obesity, as the hormone makes the human body grow in the same way. It also leads to cancer as a result of uncontrollable cell multiplication triggered by the hormone. The alarming thing is that the specific toxins can be passed on from mother to unborn foetus. In fact, apart from lifestyle, the rise of chronic diseases has been partly blamed on the consumption of GMO foods[2].

Functioning Genetically Modified elements in food, remain in the human body.

In the previous paragraph, the aspect of GMO material breaking natural barriers and being transferred to unborn offspring, has been highlighted. The even aggravating fact is that, even after a person stops consuming GMO processed foods, the active elements, remain in them. This is largely due to the body’s ability to manufacture proteins from the food one consumes. When a genetically modified protein is introduced, the body learns it and begins replicating it. For example, if  a person was to consume corn with the Bt-toxin, the toxin can be transferred and replicated in the body which could be fatal. The same is seen in how the body continues to produce the GM Bovine hormone even after the person stops consuming GMO foods(Boholm 12) .

Allergic reactions and antibiotic resistance

Human beings are not used in scientific experimentation. Lab rats, however, have an uncanny resemblance to human beings. Studies conducted on lab rats, showed numerous health hazards that emanated from GMO exposure. The experimental mice suffered from liver atrophyin, immune system reactions, fertility problems and allergies. In fact, GMO foods have been cited as causing allergic reactions to human beings. This was observed in farmers, who are exposed to Bt fertilizers, which is heavily genetically modified. The main concern towards allergies triggered by genetically modified bacteria is that they are immune to anti-biotics normally prescribed. This creates new strains that are harder and more expensive to treat considering, the logistics of time and money involved in research for new drugs (Anne & Terje 65-74).

Typically, an allergic reaction is caused by proteins in the body. GMO modified soy is lauded as being enhanced in its protein levels and it is digested longer. The increased duration of digestion is aimed at ensuring all proteins are taken up by the human body. Theoretically, this is a good thing, research on the other hand shows otherwise. In mice, the modified soy is known to reduce digestive enzymes. This predisposes the mice to gastrointestinal infections. The same is effects are observed in human beings who consume the soy.

Genes are very unpredictable

The whole concept of human DNA is very complex. Research that remains to be done is substantial and requires a lot of time, and technological advancements. On the other hand, the scientific world is governed by the cautionary principle concerning new scientific technologies and improvements in the field of medicine. In effect, this principle requires the research of ailments after they have occurred in order to come up with remedies. It is unconventional and criminal to create new disease strains. This adds a whole-dimension to the GMO argument. A given strain of disease from the GMO must come up in order for scientists to carry out research and come up with a cure. Scientists are helpless since they cannot create a cure before the disease, despite the underlying health concerns in GMOs. This exposes a lot of people to unresearched health hazards from exposure to GMOs before any medical advancements to its remedy can be done. (Fraiture 1259-1265)

The complexity of DNA makes it very unpredictable. This brings unpredictable side-effects and collateral damage from the introduction of alien genetic information to a given organism. This creates an array of toxins that can be carcinogenic or allergens. In fact, introduction of genetic modification either suppresses, or overly expresses a given gene. The effects of over-expression are cancers and obesity. Suppression on the other hand leads to ailments such as diabetes, Alzheimer’s disease and infertility. All these are terminal diseases which have no verifiable cure necessitating expensive and psychologically frustrating lifestyle changes. They also pose mortal consequences. (Seralini 438-443)

GMOs tamper with Ecological Diversities

The environment is composed of various living things that play crucial roles in it over all functioning. The introduction of GMOs greatly alters this bio-diversity. GMO pesticide and herbicides have been known to kill living things in the soil and birds. When the soil is washed up to a water body, or a water body is exposed to the GMOs, it has resulted in genetic defects of marine creatures such as fish and amphibians. This has led to birth defects or reduced fertility. This is only counterproductive to the goal of food security. On top of this, it affects or creatures in the marine ecosystem. Weeds that are also pesticide resistant have also been seen. Perhaps the most counterproductive result is the loss of soil fertility, that comes from repeated use of genetically modified fertilizers on it. (Fraiture 1259-1265)

The effect of this is that the environment loses its ability to produce food. To illustrate this, most fruits require insect and bird pollinators. These are the major casualties of pesticides and herbicide used on plants. The reduction in pollinators leads to decreased yields by fruit trees. This necessitates creation of self pollinating fruit trees, which will ultimately result in a heavy reliance on genetic engineering in agriculture. The same is observed when soil loses its fertility and ability to replenish itself. Of concern, particularly in bees, is the health concerns humans are pre-exposed to from the consumption of honey obtained from nectar from flowers sprayed with these herbicides(Calabro & Simone 128).

Conclusion

Despite even scientists from the Food and Drug Administration, calling or its withdrawal, most health and environmental risks have been ignored. GMO processes foods are not labeled, making it difficult for consumers to differentiate them in the market with non-processed foods. They are also passed as safe despite not being subjected to extensive quality assurance tests. Much like Agent Orange, a strong herbicide used during the Vietnam years, was passed as harmless to humans, but later found to be cancerous and a cause of breathing problems in humans, GMOs should be viewed with a critical eye(Seralini 438-443). This follows reports in media of a bid to lock out the public on the truth regarding health concerns raised by consumption of GMOs. (Fraiture 1259-1265)

References

Anne Ingeborg Myhr, Terje Traavik,. ‘The Precautionary Principle Applied To Deliberate   Release Of Genetically Modified Organisms (Gmos)’. Microbial Ecology in Health and            Disease 11.2 (1999): 65-74.

Boholm, Asa. New Perspectives On Risk Communication. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis, 2013.

Calabrò, Grazia, and Simone Vieri. ‘The Use Of Gmos And Consumers’ Rights In The European Union’. International Journal of Environment and Health 7.2 (2014): 128.

Clapp, Jennifer, and Doris Fuchs. Corporate Power In Global Agrifood Governance. Cambridge,             Mass.: MIT Press, 2009.

de Vendômois, Joël Spiroux. ‘Debate On Gmos Health Risks After Statistical Findings In             Regulatory Tests’. International Journal of Biological Sciences (2010): 590-598.

Fraiture, Marie-Alice et al. ‘Validation Of A Sensitive DNA Walking Strategy To Characterise             Unauthorised Gmos Using Model Food Matrices Mimicking Common Rice Products’.      Food Chemistry 173 (2015): 1259-1265.

‘Gmos Or Not’. Chemistry & Industry 75.20 (2011): 4-4.

Krimsky, Sheldon, and Jeremy Gruber. The GMO Deception.

Séralini, Gilles-Eric. ‘How Subchronic And Chronic Health Effects Can Be Neglected For Gmos,             Pesticides Or Chemicals’. International Journal of Biological Sciences (2009): 438-443.

[1] For the sake of this paper Genetically Modifid Organisms shall be referred to by their abbreviation GMO

[2] ‘Gmos Or Not’. Chemistry & Industry 75.20 (2011): 4-4.