University of Illinois’ Extension Office Wellness and Nutrition Educator Jenna Smith said that while the short-term benefits of GMO implementation included increased farm yields, the long-term consequences are not well understood and need more study before conclusions can be drawn.

Smith gave a presentation on GMOs (genetically modified organisms) Tuesday night in an OSF St. James-John W. Albrecht Medical Center conference room.

Smith opened her presentation with an overview on biotechnology, or the use of organisms in the creation of various products. She said that biotechnology has been in practice for thousands of years, and that the creation of products such as bread and wine are early examples.

The nutritionist noted that the inception of GMO implementation is the latest form of biotechnology.

“This genetic engineering is where you’re finding a specific gene with its desired trait … and you’re implanting it or transferring it into a seed, which will grow into a plant and will have that specific gene,” she said.

Smith said that the genes that are used to genetically engineer crops or plants can come from any organism. She likened the process to computerized document modification.

“It’s like a cut and paste,” Smith said. “It’s like you’re on the computer and you highlight some stuff from one document and paste it into another. It’s very much the same thing.”

She then delved into the benefits of genetically modified crops, including increased yield sizes, increased resistance to harmful insects and herbicide sprays, and increased tolerance to droughts.

Smith also said that crops could be engineered to increase their nutritional value. She noted that golden rice, a modified version of standard rice, added more vitamin A to what is a staple crop in poorer and more densely populated areas of the world.

However, she did note that GMOs were not without controversy. One of her primary concerns was with the increasing inefficacy of pesticides in combating harmful insects.

“We have seen that we’ve created these ‘super-pests,’” Smith said. “We have all of this pesticide we’ve used, and it doesn’t matter; these pests can resist that and continue to grow.”

She believes the primary cause was the overuse of pesticides in the past in combating insects and weeds, but acknowledged that she did not know whether GMOs had helped contribute.

Smith also touched on how certain studies indicate that GMO crops could be linked to colony collapse in bees and butterflies, and that other studies had correlated GMOs to increasing rates of severe health problems like cancer, autism and allergies.

While she said that there is correlative data there, it does not necessarily prove the causation of these issues in relation to GMOs.

“We can’t deny the fact that as soon as GMOs hit the market, we’ve seen higher rates of allergies, of cancer, of autism,” Smith said. “A lot of people will think automatically, then, ‘well, GMOs have caused these things.’

“We have to be very careful whenever we say that because correlation is very different than causation … I don’t know — maybe there is a link, but we can’t be quick to jump to conclusions. Maybe we’ve coincidentally just gotten better at (diagnostics).”

She also suggested that some of the studies done on the effects that GMOs may have on humans or other organisms were not performed in a practical way, in that they did not replicate a natural intake of GMOs. She said it may take many years before a true causative link between genetic modification and disease could be established.

Smith ended her presentation on the future of GMOs, saying that research into GMOs is looking at including vaccinations into crops as a cheaper and more effective means of inoculation.



