The reality of America’s GMO revolution

In 1973, Herbert Boyer and Stanley Cohen initiated the study of DNA transformation, marking a significant milestone in molecular biology.

Boyer and Cohen produced polymers containing genes from bacterial species by using recombinant DNA technology. Recombinant DNA manipulation produces “genetically-modified” or “transgenic” creatures. This historically groundbreaking innovation is employed to modify plants, animals, and microbes based on the intentions of chemists, biotechnologists, or “genetic manipulators”. Since the late 20th century, the field of genetically modified engineering has skyrocketed. Common household crops with genetically modified histories include potatoes, corn, and papaya, to name a few. Genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, have caused hazardous reactions in human health, generated intense controversy and legal dispute, and dramatically increased agricultural productivity and yield rate. Nationally, the ramifications of GMOs impact our agriculture, judicial systems, and overall physical wellness on a daily basis.

So, how have we successfully handled genetically modified products in the United States?

Despite the fact that GMOs have a great deal of unanticipated, harmful consequences on the environment, our national regulatory bodies have worked hard to reduce these effects. Since modifying farming methods related to genetically modified crops, fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions have significantly decreased. Reduced tillage farming techniques using herbicide-tolerant (HT) crops have replaced traditional spray runs on modified insect resistance (IR) crops. A publication about the effects of genetically modified crops on the environment was published by Montana State University. The journal reads, “In 2018, these practices reduced fuel use by 920 million liters, corresponding to a saving of 2,456 million kg of carbon dioxide.” (Morgan Chamberlin). Growing genetically modified IR crops has shown environmental benefits in addition to reducing fuel use. Using insecticides to manage pests is effectively replaced by this new and improved technique. Because genetically modified IR cotton crops use intense treatment methods to control insects, governments around the world have saved millions of kilograms of insecticide between 1996 and 2018. These advantageous outcomes are also seen in modified crops, such as corn and soybeans. Several field investigations and trials have been conducted by research labs and groups since the invention of GMOs with the goal of determining the unintended impacts of IR crops. For over 22 years, studies have shown that IR crops with injected insecticidal gene composition are not dangerous.

The laws and rules pertaining to biotechnology in the United States are arranged according to the following categories: efficacy, safety, health, and environment. It will need structure and leadership to develop regulations that shield the public from the possible dangers posed by genetic technologies. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are the three main authorities that oversee the regulation of biotechnology. Regarding the efficacy and safety of food for humans and biopharma, they have numerous responsibilities. Our government has effectively navigated the debate over genetically modified organisms throughout the years by formulating, passing, and endorsing regulatory policies. Some of the major statutes in place include the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Plant Protection Act, the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act, the Virus Serum Toxin Act, and the Public Health Service Act. The web page published by Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology reads, “The federal policy that no new laws were needed to regulate the products of biotechnology was first adopted in 1986 by the federal regulatory agencies in the Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology. The policy was based on the assumption that the process of biotechnology itself posed no unique or special risks.” (Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology). New regulations have been passed since then. They mandate that all GMO foods be labeled is the most well-known and recent regulation. Every bioengineered product on the market is required by US law to have a brief text or label. Food producers are instructed to refer to these cutting-edge products as “bioengineered” or “derived from bioengineering” rather than “GMO” in the current, popular terminology.

Concerns regarding GMOs’ possible health impacts have influenced regulatory choices and sparked major public discussion. The Center for Food Safety and other organizations have questioned the long-term health effects of consuming GMOs, which has led to increased investigation and examination. Although there is a general consensus in science on the safety of genetically modified foods, there are still study gaps and divergent interpretations of the available data. Therefore, maintaining consumer trust in the safety of GMOs continues to be a top concern for both regulatory bodies and food producers. The Center for Food Safety published a journal that reads, “Genetically engineered foods pose a risk to food safety due to their inherent instability and unpredictable outcomes.” (Center for Food Safety). Given the unpredictable effects of introducing new genes, genetically engineered (GE) foods are inherently unstable and present a risk to food safety. Because of this uncertainty, there is a greater need for regulatory monitoring in order to handle potential risks and guarantee public health. GMO proponents contend that extensive testing and assessment procedures are used to guarantee the safety of GMOs for human consumption. Regulations like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) use significant equivalency to compare the traits of genetically modified and non-modified crops in order to evaluate the safety of genetically modified organisms. The goal of this method is to find any discrepancies in nutritional value or composition that might have an impact on human health. Critics, on the other hand, argue that little study has been done on the long-term health impacts of consuming GMOs, citing potential hazards linked with genetic manipulation and uncertainty in research findings. A journal article written by health professionals of the National Library of Medicine states, “The results of most studies with GM foods indicate that they may cause some common toxic effects such as hepatic, pancreatic, renal, or reproductive effects and may alter the hematological, biochemical, and immunologic parameters.” (National Center for Biotechnology Information). A few studies have hypothesized a connection between eating GMOs and unfavorable health effects such as allergic reactions or changes in the gut microbiome. These results have increased public doubt and called for more comprehensive research into the health impacts of GMOs.

The United States successfully regulates GMOs by balancing risk assessment and innovation. While GMOs hold promise for improving crops, emerging technologies like gene editing also raise ethical and legal questions. This equilibrium guarantees that the intricate terrain of biotechnology is traversed conscientiously. Moreover, cross-sector cooperation tackles more general issues including food security, sustainability, and fair access to agricultural technologies. The US demonstrates its leadership in the responsible management of GMOs for the good of society and the environment by placing a high priority on openness, cooperation, and evidence-based decision-making. The U.S. continues to make efforts in addressing the legal, health, and environmental aspects of managing GMOs, while emphasizing the need for cooperative action and well-informed decision-making.