14 March 26, 2015 2015 Logan County Farm Outlook Magazine Lincoln Daily News.com
and have concluded that foods with biotech-derived
ingredients do not pose any more risks to people than
any other foods GMO doubters often have concerns
about the effect on the environment and safety of
food. As M. Buiatti , P. Christou, and G. Pastore note,
“Despite the potential benefits of the application of
genetic engineering in agriculture in order to improve
the quality and the reliability of the food supply,
since the beginning, public and scientific concerns
have been raised in many parts of the world about
environmental and food safety of GM crops.”
Some still argue that there are many unknowns
concerning “potentially adverse impacts on the
environment and human health” and feel that more
research and utilization are needed. Buiati notes that
concerns have been raised over “the capability of a
GMO to escape . . .and therefore potentially to transfer
engineered genes into wild populations” Christou
counters this argument, stating, “Gene flow does
occur between GM crops and related weeds and wild
species, but the consequences of this process are
exaggerated.” He also notes GM crops are currently
submitted for risk assessment on a case-by-case basis
using science-based risk assessment procedures, and
acknowledging, “we cannot expect zero risk.”
Others focus concern on the possibility of a transfer
of allergens into the new foods, . . [and] the mixing
of GM crops with those derived from conventional
seeds, that could have an indirect effect on food
safety and food security. However, as Goodman et al.
(2008) noted, “Regulators have sought to prevent the
intentional or accidental transfer of genes encoding
major allergens into food crops in which they were
previously absent” (cited in Buiati et al.)
Barrows, Sexton, and Zilberman argue that in
spite of environmental risks posed by agricultural
biotechnology, theory and empirical evidence suggest
genetically engineered crops deliver environmental
benefits, saving land and agrochemicals and
maintaining, rather than diminishing, agricultural
biodiversity.
Considering acceptance or rejection of GMOs and
biotechnology, Minnesota farmer Kristy Swenson
gave a values-oriented summary:
“with . . . the vast amount of information available,
it is so hard to sort out . . . what’s twisted from
what’s true. What one person finds credible may not
be a credible source for someone else. I encourage
you to seek out sources of information that provide
facts rather than perpetuating myths, to have
respectful conversations with people who work with
biotechnology, and to think critically about what you
find.”
Story by Angela Reiners
Barrows, Geoffrey, Steven Sexton, and David
Zilberman. 2014. “Agricultural Biotechnology:
The Promise and Prospects of Genetically Modified
Crops.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(1): 99-
120.
Buiatti, M., Christou, P., Pastore, G. “The application
of GMOs in agriculture and in food production for a
better nutrition: two different scientific points of view
Genes Nutrition. (2013) 8:255–270
CommonGround Volunteer Shares GMO Insight
/
National Corn Grower’s Association. “Biotechnology:
GMO Labeling”
National Research Council of the U.S. National
Academy of Sciences. 2010. “The Impact of
Genetically Engineered Crops on Farm Sustainability
in the United States”
Spiertz, Huub. Food production, crops and
sustainability: restoring confidence in science and
technology
