Marching Against Monsanto.JPG

Reader says labeling foods that contain genetically modified foods simply informs the customer.

(File photo)

To the Editor;

Amitrajeeta A. Batabyal, a professor not of genetics, but economics, cherry-picked the scientific literature and came up with some studies that say what he wanted them to say about the safety of genetically modified organisms (GMO).. But he is missing the point. There is a growing movement in this country of people who want to know more about our food -- what we eat, where it comes from, how it's produced, if it's healthy. Proper labeling helps us choose what we want to eat.

GMOs are present in approximately 80 percent of the processed food sold in grocery stores and have been for more than a decade now. So what's the problem with them?

Genetic engineering is a process in which selected genes from one species are inserted into the DNA of another species, often using a gene gun or via a virus or bacteria. This process overcomes the natural barriers that prevent bacteria from mating with corn plants, for example. The goal is to get the second species to express a specific trait (produce a specific protein) found in the first species. But it turns out that genetics is a lot more complex than we thought, and the process of genetic engineering is far from precise, with the possibility for unpredictable changes in the DNA, proteins, and nutritional composition of the new organisms. To me, this alone justifies taking the whole GMO thing a lot slower!

Most of the GMOs that are currently in our food system are crops that have been engineered to be either pest-resistant (they create their own pesticide, the bacterial-derived Bt toxin), or herbicide-resistant, so farmers can spray them with weed killers such as Roundup (glyphosate) without killing the crop. Despite being told by the makers of Roundup that Bt toxin is completely digested and then excreted by the human digestive system, a recent Canadian study found the toxin in the blood of pregnant women and their fetuses. Further research is required to determine any potential health impacts of this exposure.

There is also a growing body of independent animal feeding studies linking consumption of genetically engineered feed with adverse health impacts ranging from stomach inflammation in pigs to multiple organ toxicities in mice. There is also strong evidence of the negative environmental impacts associated with the cultivation of GMO crops. For example, the spraying of glyphosate on millions of acres has decimated the milkweed that Monarch butterflies need to survive. The numbers of this exquisite butterfly are at an all-time low this year.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), whose responsibility it is to maintain the safety of our food supply and label foods, has essentially abdicated these responsibilities when it comes to GMOs. There is a voluntary consultation process the companies that produce GMOs can engage in with the FDA, but most decline to do so. The FDA doesn't conduct its own safety studies, instead relying on assurances from the GMO producers that their products are safe. The FDA then rubberstamps their approval, and voila! a new GMO is approved for commercialization. The FDA also doesn't have any oversight of the product once it's out there in the market. The absence of labeling, which the FDA says is not necessary since it has proclaimed GMOs to be as safe as their conventionally produced counterparts, means that any potential health impacts can't be traced or accounted for.

Lastly, the claim that "there is no way to feed the world without the help of GMOs" is simply not true. To get enough vitamin A from Golden rice to make a difference, children would have to eat more than is humanly possible per day. In the meantime, vitamin A supplements and education on breastfeeding and leafy vegetable planting/cooking have saved many lives. It's also now coming to the forefront more and more that GM crops don't have a better yield than their non-GM counterparts, and even the UN is now saying that what we need to feed the world is to produce the food where it's needed, with small-scale organic/permaculture farming techniques.

There are so many unknowns about GMOs and their risks to humans and the environment, and that alone is justification for labeling them. Labels already include ingredients by order of quantity, fat and vitamin content, and country of origin. Adding a label to indicate a food has been genetically engineered is just another piece of information consumers can use when making purchasing decisions.

But most importantly, I have a right to know what's in my food and how it's made. I have the right to choose what to feed myself and my family! Labeling GMO foods will give me that right.



Elizabeth Henderson

Newark, NY

