Scientific Discourse Powers Public Fear on GMOs
Why does the public have a widespread concern about genetically modified organisms?
By Dhivya Bala
Walking down Detroit Street in Ann Arbor, Michigan, you can’t help but be enthralled by the endless rows of colors that paint a rainbow of produce at the Ann Arbor Farmers Market. Past the entrance of the white tents, the first table is covered in a red and white gingham tablecloth and is occupied by Erie Orchards & Cider Mill. Behind the table is 67-year-old Jerry Hunt, who sells his non-GMO blueberries sporting a large beard and an even larger smile.
“It’s not the way your body is meant to eat it,” Hunt says when asked about GMOs, or genetically modified organisms.
The Ann Arbor Farmers Market in 2019. Photo by Dominick Sokotoff/Michiganensian
Two decades after the development of a genetically modified crop for human consumption, there is still a sense of apprehension when it comes to GMOs. Some scientists say that GMOs are perfectly fine to eat, while others argue that you should still be wary of them due to potential health effects. A similar trend exists in global legislation. As of July 1, 2021, New South Wales will permit GM crops in every mainland Australian state. In stark contrast, just 7 months prior, the Mexican government banned GM corn imports. With such a large contrast among global policy, the confusion among the public is warranted.
“It’s a little bit too much playing God for me,” Anna Wiley, a farmer at Jacob’s Fresh Farm in Chelsea, Michigan, says about GMOs.
How exactly did this debate sprout? It started in 1994, with the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the first genetically modified food, a tomato called Flavr Savr. This tomato was created through the insertion of an advantageous gene that would delay ripening and cause a longer shelf life. Currently, there are other genes in use that can create resistance to certain insects and herbicides.
The first genetically modified organism was a tomato. Photo by Dominick Sokotoff/Michiganensian
There are several aspects of GMOs that make people fearful of them. A dominant concern is the potential toxicity of GMOs. Science is not definite, so health organizations like the World Health Organization encourage you to be cautious. A genetically modified plant could become damaging if the gene transferred into the plant is cancerous to the human body. Though the chances of this occurring are small, some people make a personal choice to avoid GMOs.
Many scientists have also brought up environmental concerns. If uncontrolled, plants like the Flavr-Savr tomato that have a survival advantage could takeover populations of traditional tomatoes. Outcompeting these populations, a GM crop could become invasive and decrease biodiversity. Although these issues are not prevalent among those concerned with GMOs, it is a compelling argument for those who wish to evade them.
Many products pledge to be non-GMO to provide transparency to consumers. Photo by Dhivya Bala
“Consumer perception is the largest concern,” Lizzy Mashburn and Flavia Mendes wrote in an email interview. Mashburn and Mendes are technical reviewers for Food Product Certification at NSF International, a public health and safety organization.
Many advocacy groups address the concerns stirring consumers’ perception. One nonprofit, the Non-GMO Project, states that “there is no scientific consensus on the safety of GMOs.” This is true to some extent because scientists have varying studies and opinions.
In a publication called “GMO Myths and Truths,” which has been used by the Non-GMO Project, scientists and authors Dr. John Fagan, Dr. Michael Antoniou, and Claire Robinson state that GM crops “can be toxic, allergenic or less nutritious than their natural counterparts.” On the contrary, a 2018 article in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology states that “no case reports of allergic reactions or immunotoxic effects were found in GM versus non-GM-fed animals.” These conflicting ideas have created uncertainty in the scientific community, which has manifested as fear in the public.
Growing non-GMO crops is an important goal for Green Things Farm Collective, which sells its crops at the Ann Arbor Farmers Market. Courtesy of Jill Lada and Green Things Farm Collective
Mashburn and Mendes, who have worked with those from the Non-GMO Project, write “there is no scientific evidence to support fear (of GMOs), and there is also not enough evidence to support why GMOs should not be feared.”
Since there’s a lack of clarity, Mashburn and Mendes assert that “any consumer should have the option to avoid consumption of GMOs if that is their preference.” Products with a non-GMO label are not claiming any health benefits, rather they “preserve the transparency of the supply chain.”
Overall, with no definitive scientific research except for years of observation, it is understandable that the public is wary of something so foreign. As a farmer, Wiley feels particularly strong about GMOs, describing them as an unethical distribution of power. “It does not leave the power in the hands of the producer,” Wiley says.
Nonetheless, the duty lies in the hands of the people to educate themselves on the topic before claiming an argument. Mashburn and Mendes say “the public should simply do their research!” Trusting in science, even when it seems daunting, leads to the most accurate and educated decisions.
