Genetically Modified Crops Are Secure, Analysis Finds

 

Meta-Analysis Finds Big GMO Benefits

Video taken from the channel: Market to Market


 

ILSI IFBiC Safety Of GM Crops: Compositional Analysis (Speaker: Laura Privalle)

Video taken from the channel: ILSI Global


 

Conflicting Science on the Safety of Genetically Modified Food

Video taken from the channel: GBHForumNetwork


 

The Surprising Role of Genetically Modified Corn

Video taken from the channel: Oregon State University


 

Should Genetically Modified Crops Be Banned?

Video taken from the channel: The Doctors


 

Controversies and Risks of Genetically Modified Foods and Herbicides with Dave Schubert

Video taken from the channel: University of California Television (UCTV)


 

Are GMOs Good or Bad? Genetic Engineering & Our Food

Video taken from the channel: Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell


TUESDAY, May 17, 2016 (HealthDay News) Genetically modified crops pose no apparent risk to human health, an extensive study released Tuesday by a U.S. science advisory board has concluded. Crops created through genetic engineering are as safe to eat as crops developed through traditional plant-breeding methods, according to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and. Genetically engineered crops appear to be safe to eat and do not harm the environment, according to a comprehensive new analysis by the advisory group the National Academies of Science.

Genetically modified crops on the market are not only safe, but appear to be good for people and the environment, experts determined in a report released Tuesday. Genetically engineered crops appear to be safe to eat and do not harm the environment, according to a comprehensive new analysis by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, an. TUESDAY, May 17, 2016 (HealthDay News) Genetically modified crops pose no apparent risk to human health, an extensive study released Tuesday by a U. Genetically-engineered crops safe to and a new report from a leading science organization finds it’s generally safe for humans Farms that use genetically modified crops. Genetically engineered (GE) crops are no different from conventional crops in terms of their risks to human health and the environment, according to a.

This is not to say that everything done in the name of genetic engineering has a clean bill of health. Controversy abounds over the use of genetically modified seeds that produce crops like so. When it is possible to speak of genetically engineered crops as a broad category, it’s of about as much use as reporting that cars are safe, or that pets are safe.

Both of those things are. The “first generation” crops with traits such as insect resistance and herbicide tolerance have proven their ability to lower farm-level production costs. The “second-generation” GM crops feature increased nutritional and/or industrial traits.

These crops have more direct benefits to consumers.

List of related literature:

Numerous investigations have confirmed that cultivation of genetically modified plants is safe, as far as approved plants are concerned which have passed a step by step risk assessment procedure, as is commonly applied in most countries growing genetically modified organisms (GMO) today.

“Genetic Modification of Plants: Agriculture, Horticulture and Forestry” by Frank Kempken, Christian Jung
from Genetic Modification of Plants: Agriculture, Horticulture and Forestry
by Frank Kempken, Christian Jung
Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009

Thus, risk assessments concentrate on whether the genetically modified characteristics of a GM crop, and of similarly modified hybridizing relatives, are likely to change the behaviour of the plants in their environments to the extent that ecological balances are altered.

“Encyclopedia of Genetics” by Eric C. R. Reeve, Isobel Black
from Encyclopedia of Genetics
by Eric C. R. Reeve, Isobel Black
Fitzroy Dearborn, 2001

Insect-resistant crops covered 19 million ha (19% of the area under genetically modified organisms (GMOs)) and crops with a combination of transgenic traits (insect resistance and herbicide tolerance) covered 13.1 million ha (13% of the area under GMOs) (James 2006).

“Sustainable Agriculture” by Eric Lichtfouse, Mireille Navarrete, Philippe Debaeke, Souchere Véronique, Caroline Alberola
from Sustainable Agriculture
by Eric Lichtfouse, Mireille Navarrete, et. al.
Springer Netherlands, 2009

The development of methods for the genetic transformation of major crops such as the cereals, brassicas, and potatoes has given plant scientists the opportunity to revisit wild relatives as sources of disease resistance.

“Plant Pathology and Plant Pathogens” by John A. Lucas
from Plant Pathology and Plant Pathogens
by John A. Lucas
Wiley, 2020

Although a reasonable conclusion would be that the genetic modification of crops, which is an extremely powerful tool, markedly increases the potential of all crop species, the production of nutritionally improved and enhanced crop plants would present a new problem concerning safety assessment.

“Biotechnology in Functional Foods and Nutraceuticals” by Debasis Bagchi, Francis C. Lau, Dilip K. Ghosh
from Biotechnology in Functional Foods and Nutraceuticals
by Debasis Bagchi, Francis C. Lau, Dilip K. Ghosh
CRC Press, 2010

A 1989 National Research Council report noted that crops “modified by molecular and cellular methods should pose risks no different from those modified by classical genetic methods for similar traits” (NRC, 1989:67).

“Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects” by National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Division on Earth and Life Studies, Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources, Committee on Genetically Engineered Crops: Past Experience and Future Prospects
from Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects
by National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Division on Earth and Life Studies, et. al.
National Academies Press, 2017

GM crops are under extensive research to obtain high yield, potential bioactive compounds, remediation of soil and water, antimetabolites against biotic attacks such as pathogen, herbivore and insect or pest resistance.

“Sustainable Agriculture Reviews” by Eric Lichtfouse
from Sustainable Agriculture Reviews
by Eric Lichtfouse
Springer International Publishing, 2017

For strong criticism of Canada’s standards and procedures for determining whether they are safe, see Katherine Barrett and Elisabeth Abergel, “Safety of GM Crops: Defining a Safe Genetically Modified Organism: Boundaries of Scientific Risk Assessment,” 29 Science and Public Policy 47 (2002).

“Catastrophe: Risk and Response” by Richard A. Posner
from Catastrophe: Risk and Response
by Richard A. Posner
Oxford University Press, 2004

In addition, the genetic engineering for pest or pesticide resistance of GMOs also threatens vital pollinators by facilitating monocultures and increased pesticide and fertilizer, mainly synthetic, uses where GMOs are cultivated.

“International Food Law and Policy” by Gabriela Steier, Kiran K. Patel
from International Food Law and Policy
by Gabriela Steier, Kiran K. Patel
Springer International Publishing, 2017

The data that are currently used for the safety assessment of GM crops have focused on the potential perceived risks associated with modern biotechnology.

“Encyclopedia of Agriculture and Food Systems” by Neal K. Van Alfen
from Encyclopedia of Agriculture and Food Systems
by Neal K. Van Alfen
Elsevier Science, 2014

Oktay Kutluk

Kutluk Oktay, MD, FACOG is one of the world's foremost experts in fertility preservation as well as ovarian stimulation and in vitro fertilization for infertility treatments. He developed and performed the world's first ovarian transplantation procedures as well as pioneered new ovarian stimulation protocols for embryo and oocyte freezing for breast and endometrial cancer patients.

Mail: [email protected]
Telephone: +1 (877) 492-3666

Biography: https://medicine.yale.edu/profile/kutluk_oktay/
Bibliography: oktay_bibliography

View all posts

9 comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • I don’t know why some people think that GMOs are terrible and bad for the ecosystem and is “not natural!” When GMOs can do all of the good things in this video and will not harm you and could be used to save the environment by making plants that don’t need so much pesticide so that we don’t kill lots of innocent animals (including bees) or that make more produce so that we don’t need to chop down forests to grow the same amount of food as a small farm that uses GMOs

  • For many thousands of years all civilization lived in respect for nature and for the profound balance that gave us life and food. We selected seeds in synergy with the sun, the earth and the whole biosphere, pests and deseases included. We did this based on the principles of patience, consistency and fertility, working with nature and not against it. Natural selection is different from GMOs simply because it takes in account for the many many variables of a vast, dynamic and extremely complex balance. It has operated and worked perfectly during billion of years in a lab which is littelay large like the whole planet. Thinking we can do better, is sin of pride. To me, OGM is like a plaster on a very bad wound. A patch invented by a humanity devoted to hurry, to exploitation of the erath and consumerism. We should fix those deep wounds in the first place. Only then we’ll be able to practice a real sustainable and healthy agriculture.

  • Calling all KZGT subscribers and readers note I will increase my daily calling out of invasive hate trolls until this stops. KZGT fans and science respecting educated adults who hate trolls and malicious liars Join me in reporting the anti-science GMO hater troll ‘Almost but Not Entirely Unreasonable’ who is in fact mentally ill. Let’s not allow hater trolls and malicious liar stalkers to take over this venue. Whether they are Russian spammers, Greenpeace activists or organic industry operatives the result is the same. If you sort for newest and scroll down you will see just how bad this infection is. We welcome debate but not liars with ulterior motives that insult the integrity of our hard working farmers and scientists. Flag him for spam or cyber bullying and report his channel because the shitty, practically non-existent moderation scheme in G+ has no specific button for reporting stalkers or malicious trolls. KZGT works on your behalf to post the truth, don’t let trolls get away with trying to discredit the effort. To report these trolls, click on their channels, locate the flag button and report them for cyber bullying or spam or both. Copy this page’s address into the complaint form and click it.

  • Sure the use of glyphosate has increased, but its still a lot less toxic than the chemicals we were using fifty years ago as herbicides. Its even less toxic and has less environmental impact than organic herbicides like copper sulfate.

  • Paste this: 14730317. Peer-reviewed, published ‘safety’ study, based on a SINGLE feeding: Excerpt: ” “The transgene did not survive passage through the intact gastrointestinal tract of human subjects fed GM soya. Three of seven ileostomists showed evidence of low-frequency gene transfer from GM soya to the microflora of the small bowel before their involvement in these experiments. As this low level of epsps in the intestinal microflora did not increase after consumption of the meal containing GM soya, we conclude that gene transfer did not occur during the feeding experiment. ”
    How did the GMO gene get into the 3 trialists BEFORE the (single meal!) study? Magic? Or in line with these UN Codex concerns: “Pg 18, “56: Gene transfer from plants and their food products to gut micro-organisms or human cells is considered a rare possibility because of the many complex and unlikely events that would need to occur consecutively. Nevertheless, the possibility of such events cannot be completely discounted.6”

    Hmmm, magic vs science…take your pick, So, KZGT, the safety science is in, right? Show us ONE human safety study that meets UN Codex protocols on GMO foods…just ONE HUMAN STUDY….c’mon, how hard can it be? REAL SCIENCE, not colourful ‘berd’ science…

  • Would love to hear a discussion between Dave and Kevin Folta.  For example, on a recent Talking Biotech Podcast (#206) they seem to suggest Glyphosate/GMO scare is driven by money, and not science.  Also any update on Salk’s work on curcumin (J147) and the fisetin (CMS121)?

  • But I can’t be the only one that’s weary about the food we consume goes through a lab and gets changed. 6:44 that’s what I’m terrified of.

  • You can live without pesticides but you cant live without seeds. If GMO seed is unable to reproduce that basicly means that human depend from new supplies from specific, hungry companies. This for me seems as very slippery slope

  • I want to see plants genetically engineered to be grown effectively in low gravity environments so we can fill space stations and colonies with them.