Myths and Realities about Genetically Modified Food: A Risk-Benefit Analysis

Abstract

The development and consumption of genetically modified (GM) crops are surrounded by controversy. According to proponents, only molecular biology approaches and genetic engineering tools are realistic food shortage solutions for the world’s ever-growing population. The main purpose of this study is to review the impact of GM products on human, animal, and environmental health. People still reject GM crops not only because of safety concerns, but also for moral reasons. Toxicity, allergies, and possible horizontal gene transfer (HGT) to the environment or to other species have been associated with the marketing of GM products. Moreover, the scarce data available about the long-term implications of using GM crops is another opponent concern. Nevertheless, science has evidenced no harm from GM crops use to date but has, instead, reported several benefits that result from their commercialization, such as economic, environmental, and health benefits for the general public. Legislation and policies about GM product labeling standards are being discussed. To overcome emerging food security challenges, considering quality scientific information is essential rather than leaving the issue and merely moving toward moral discussion. Hence, a risk–benefit analysis is necessary.

Genetically engineered crops for sustainably enhanced food production systems

“…In 1990, GM tobacco plants that were resistance to tobacco mosaic virus (TMV) were first commercialized by China ( Wu and Butz, 2004 ). In 1994, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the Flavr Savr tomato (Calgene, USA) as the first GM crop for human consumption ( Vega Rodríguez et al., 2022 ). The antisense technology was used to genetically modify this tomato plant by interfering the production of the enzyme polygalacturonase, major enzyme responsible for pectin disassembly in ripening fruit, that retarded its ripening and protected it from rot ( Bawa and Anilakumar, 2013 ).…”

“…Moreover, the GM crops are developed with improved shelf-life that can be stored for longer periods without wastage. Such practices appeal to the ethical principles of beneficence and justice, which means to have fair and equitable food supply that will benefit the larger society ( Smyth, 2020a ; MatouskovaVanderberg, 2022 ; Vega Rodríguez et al., 2022 ).…”

“…Hence, the introduction of GM crops can save human lives. The potential risks of GM crops that are not proven remain insignificant for people who are starving or having severe nutrient deficiencies ( Vega Rodríguez et al., 2022 ). People with life threatening disease deploy themselves to experimental drugs, which is considered ethical after a consent, the same could be applied to the GM crops.…”

Green Revolution to Gene Revolution: Technological Advances in Agriculture to Feed the World

“…PG was found to dissolve cell-wall pectin in the fruit ripening process. By silencing the PG expression, the transgenic Flavr Savr tomato had a longer shelf-life than the non-transgenic tomato [ 60 ]. In 1995, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved the first pesticide-producing food crops (Bt potato and Bt corn) and non-food crops (Bt cotton) [ 49 ].…”

To become more sustainable organic agriculture needs genome editing technology

“…To cite one of the many statements around the safety of products from modern biotechnology and their potential to help in SDG and overcome environmental problems, a recent study in Spain (Vega Rodríguez et al, 2022) showed that GMOs can serve as nutraceuticals and edible vaccines without the need for broad-scale industrial facilities for production. Thus, genetically edited foods need to be treated as traditional foods, and food security needs to be prioritized over the methods by which genetic modification/edition traits and properties were incorporated.…”