Advanced English

Accessibility Information and Tips Title: Genetically Modified Foods: Overview. Authors: Rich, Alex K. Warhol, Tom Source: Points of View: Genetically Modified Foods. 6/1/2018, p1-1. 1p. Document Type: Article Subjects: GENETICALLY modified foods FOOD biotechnology PLANT genetic engineering ORGANIC farmers Geographic Terms: UNITED StatesReport Available Abstract: The article presents an overview of issues related to genetically modified foods in the U.S. Some of the improvements made possible by genetic engineering of food crops such as herbicide-resistant soybeans and insecticidal corn are cited. It traces the history of GM food and its regulation by the U.S. government. The problems posed by GM contamination for organic farmers are discussed. Lexile: 1420 ISBN: 9781429815529 Accession Number: 23253318 Genetically Modified Foods: Overview Full Text Related Items Point: The Next Agricultural Revolution. Counterpoint: The Pandora's Box of Genetically Modified Foods. Genetically Modified Foods: Guide to Critical Analysis.

Genetically Modified Foods. Genetically Modified Rice Demonstrators in Ottawa calling for the government to make it mandatory to labell genetically modified foods Genetically Altered Foods: Hazards or Harmless? Choose a Topic. Evaluate a Website. Write a Topic Sentence. How To Understand the Bias of a Publication CURRICULUM STANDARDS--U.S. Introduction Genetically modified food (also GM food, bioengineered food, genetically modified organisms, GMOs) is food in which, at some point during the production process, molecules and proteins are chemically altered to give the food more nutrients, a better appearance, or a longer shelf life. Genetically modified grain is often fed to livestock used for meat and dairy products. Much of the produce sold in the United States is grown from genetically modified seeds. Farming has relied on selective growth and selective breeding for thousands of years; farmers gather and sow seeds from plants that display desirable characteristics, such as resistance to certain fungi or bacteria. Over a period of several years, a farmer could create an ideal strain of a particular plant through a sort of artificial natural selection, forcing the plant to evolve in the most beneficial way to the farmer. Similarly, if certain cows produce leaner meat than others, those cows can be bred together to reliably produce lean beef.

With advances in humanity's understanding of DNA and genetics, it has become possible to speed up this process by inserting and removing specific genes from plants and animals. Once a gene carrying a specific favorable characteristic is identified, it can theoretically be inserted into any other organism to elicit that characteristic. Thus, genetic engineering has produced herbicide-resistant soybeans and insecticidal corn. The general consensus is that there is no limit to the alterations and improvements that can be made to foods. The United States does not require food labels to state the presence of genetically modified organisms or genetically modified ingredients in food products. Products that are labeled as "Certified Organic" must be free of GMOs; the organic label itself, however, is voluntary. Similarly, some companies elect to label their food products as "GMO-free," but since these labels are not official or certified by any government agency, they are not as reliable as "Certified Organic" labels. The Pew Research Center reported in August 2015 that a poll conducted by the Associated Press and the market research institute GfK in 2014 found that 66 percent of Americans supported requiring GM food to be labeled and 24 percent expressed no preference, and a 2013 poll by the New York Times and CBS News found that 93 percent of respondents supported mandatory labeling. However, a sizable majority (88 percent) of American Association for the Advancement of Science members believe that GM food is not significantly different from other food and that it is safe to eat, and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials contend that it poses no significant risk to consumers. Understanding the Discussion Certified Organic: A label applied to food that meets certain regulations regarding renewable, ecologically based production methods, including the absence of growth hormones, most pesticides, synthetic fertilizers, and any GMOs. To receive the organic label, a product must be inspected by the USDA to ensure that specific practices are followed during its production, cultivation, storage, and transportation. Organizations that sell less than $5,000 worth of organic products each year are exempt from certification by the USDA. Food Additive: According to the FDA, a food additive is any substance added to food during production, processing, treatment, packaging, transportation, or storage which affects any of the characteristics of the food. Direct additives are usually used to maintain product consistency, improve or retain nutritional value, prevent spoilage, improve color or appearance, or control other factors such as acidity. Indirect additives are those that may get into food in trace amounts due to packaging or transportation. Food and Drug Administration (FDA): A regulatory agency of the US government that controls food, dietary supplements, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, radiation-emitting devices, biologics, and blood products. The stated purpose of the FDA is to protect American citizens from potentially harmful products in these categories. GRAS: Acronym for "Generally Recognized as Safe," an FDA designation referring to a food additive for which experts have attested to its safety, usually because of their longstanding

common use or scientific vetting prior to 1958. GRAS substances are not regulated as food additives by the FDA or the USDA, but are monitored: their GRAS status may be revoked in light of new evidence regarding their safety. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA): A cabinet-level department in the US government that develops and enforces policy related to farming, agriculture, and food. The current major concern of the USDA is to maintain and promote the country's agriculture industry by helping farmers sell and distribute their products. History The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act of 1938 established the FDA, and gave the agency the authority to regulate food and food ingredients and to establish certain requirements for food labeling and packaging. Twenty years later, the act was amended in order to broaden the FDA's authority to include regulation of food additives; some additives had already been approved by the USDA, and were automatically approved by the FDA, as well. In 1977, scientists discovered that a soil microbe, Agrobacterium tumefaciens, was capable of injecting foreign genes into plants, and the potential for modifying and improving plant crops was immediately recognized. Early experiments with the soil bug produced plants that were resistant to insects and herbicides. Most of the genetic modification since then has involved plants, but some animals have had their genes manipulated in similar ways, including cows that produce casein-enriched milk for ease in making cheese, mice that contain healthy fish oils, and pigs augmented with spinach genes to produce low-fat bacon. In the early 1990s, the government recognized that GM food warranted consideration and possible regulation. Former Vice President Dan Quayle headed a regulatory review committee that dealt with genetically modified food. The committee ruled that GM food had "substantial equivalence" with unaltered food, and therefore did not need to be regulated by the FDA. Despite this decision, the majority of the public who are aware of GMOs believes the FDA is monitoring their use. Opponents of the decision claim that the food is changed and augmented; therefore, the genetic modifications should be treated as food additives, and they should be monitored and regulated by the FDA. The first genetically modified tomato appeared on US grocery store shelves in 1994. Supporters of GM food immediately claimed that the process can increase flavor and nutrition and reduce cost by removing the guesswork from food production. Opponents claimed that genetic engineering has not been sufficiently studied and could potentially be unsafe. Like the rationale used in protests over the use of antibiotics, many people feel that creating insect-proof plants will just create stronger, more resistant insects. The question of biodiversity is also critical when discussing GM foods, though there is evidence showing that GM crops both reduce and increase biodiversity.

In February 1999, biochemist Arpad Pustzai at the Rowett Research Institute in Scotland and his colleagues found that some strains of GM potatoes were toxic to rats. Despite being criticized by other scientists, the study prompted a public backlash against GM food in Europe. Eventually, Europe began to impose strict regulations on the cultivation and importation of GM food. Genetically Modified Foods Today According to the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, the United States has been the leader in GM crop planting since the mid-1990s. As of 2003, 105.7 million acres of American farmland were devoted to GM crops such as corn, cotton, and soybeans. The Pew Initiative also found that most Americans do not feel strongly one way or the other about GM foods. The study indicated that the majority of Americans are unaware of, and unconcerned about, GM foods. In the United States, the two major political parties are both generally in favor of GM food, making controversy all but nonexistent. Critics of GMOs, however, claim that consumers are not given the choice of whether to accept or reject the alleged benefits of GM food because they are not informed about which foods have been genetically modified. In August 2006, the USDA announced that pollen from genetically modified rice had contaminated crops in Arkansas, prompting Japan and the European Union to ban imports of US long-grain rice. Pollen drift of this sort has been a problem for several years, particularly with so-called "pharma crops," which are developed for potential use in pharmaceuticals. Seed contamination, often caused by something as simple as spilled GM seed in a truck getting mixed in with normal seeds before being planted, can also cause crop contamination. A 2006 survey of 45 organic farms in Spain found that approximately 25 percent of their crops had been contaminated with pollen from GM crops. GM contamination poses problems for organic farmers, who would lose their certification if their crops were discovered to be contaminated. Even though GM crops are not regulated, organic crops are, and to be certified organic by the USDA, crops must be completely free of genetic modifications. There is currently a large market for organic products in the United States for just this reason. European countries often refuse crops that are not free of genetic modification, due to strict regulatory practices. Many advocates for GM crops claim that preventing contamination is a simple matter of planting buffer crops, or other plants that form a barrier between the organic crops and potential sources of contamination, but often this solution is not feasible for small farms. Others have proposed using the principles of genetic modification to solve the problem, by sterilizing GM plants so that they would be unable to produce pollen or viable seeds. In June 2010, the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of Monsanto Co., which had been ordered by a lower court to stop selling pesticide-resistant alfalfa seeds before the culmination of an

environmental study. The seeds had been criticized by opponents who believe they may contaminate unmodified alfalfa fields. In July 2015, the House of Representatives took a step toward preventing individual states from instituting their own laws regarding mandatory labels on food products that contain GMOs. The House passed the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act, which would create a voluntary federal program for companies that wish to certify their products as GMO-free. The bill would have prevented states such as Maine, Connecticut, and Vermont, which have passed laws requiring the labeling of GMOs, from enforcing them. Proponents of the legislation argued that mandatory labels would send a misleading message that GMOs are dangerous. However, once the bill reached the Senate, it was referred to committee and was not voted on. In July 2016, a bill passed by Congress to amend the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 was signed into law by President Barack Obama. The new law establishes a national standard for defining "bioengineered food," subject to refinement by the secretary of agriculture, and requires manufacturers to label foods that meet that standard; however, it also gives companies significant leeway with regard to what form that label should take. Manufacturers may choose to provide a simple text label, use a standard icon, include a scannable quick-response (QR) code directing consumers to an information website, or have consumers call a toll-free number. Opponents of GMO labeling objected to the new law, claiming that it perpetuates misguided fears about GMO foods and that the measures necessary to comply with it would likely lead to increases in food costs, while supporters objected to the perceived laxity of the labeling requirement. After passage of the 2016 GMO food labeling law, the USDA was tasked with developing the national standard for labeling bioengineered foods, called the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (NBFDS). In May 2018, the USDA published an incomplete draft of the NBFDS and opened it to public review and input through July 3, 2018. The USDA was particularly interested in public feedback on how to label ingredients that are used in forms that are processed to the extent that they do not contain detectable amounts of genetic material. The USDA also had yet to decide on contamination thresholds for labeling non-GMO foods that may inadvertently or unavoidably contain a percentage of bioengineered foods. When the NBFDS goes into effect in 2020, food manufacturers will be required by law to use NBFDS labels. These essays and any opinions, information or representations contained therein are the creation of the particular author and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of EBSCO Information Services. 1n1.jpg. Bibliography Books

Ahmed, Farid E., editor. Testing of Genetically Modified Organisms in Foods. Food Products Press, 2004. Ruse, Michael, and David Castle, editors. Genetically Modified Foods: Debating Biotechnology. Prometheus Books, 2002. Periodicals Bittman, Mark. "GMO Labeling Law Could Stir a Revolution." The New York Times, 2 Sept. 2016, www.nytimes.com/2016/09/02/opinion/gmo-labeling-law-could-stir-a-revolution.html. Accessed 14 Oct. 2016. "Genetically Modified Foods." Congressional Digest, Mar. 2001, p. 65. Points of View Reference Center, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pwh&AN=4483488&site=pov-live. Accessed 11 Oct. 2016. Hemphill, Thomas A., and Syagnik Banerjee. "Mandatory Food Labeling for GMOs." Regulation, vol. 37, no. 4, 2014-15, pp. 7-10. Business Source Complete, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=100700018&site=eds-live. Accessed 11 Oct. 2016. Jalonick, Mary Clare. "Genetically Modified Foods Confuse Consumers." The Big Story, Associated Press, 17 May 2014, bigstory.ap.org/article/genetically-modified-foods-confuse-consumers-1. Accessed 11 Oct. 2016. Jalonick, Mary Clare. "USDA Develops New Government Label for GMO-Free Products." Washington Post, 14 May 2015, www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/usda-develops-certification-labeling-for-gmo-f ree-foods/2015/05/14/61822a1c-fa54-11e4-9ef4-1bb7ce3b3fb7%5Fstory.html. Accessed 11 Oct. 2016. Kendall, Brent. "High Court Sides with Monsanto in Alfalfa Case." Wall Street Journal, 22 June 2010, www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704895204575320664136428870. Accessed 11 Oct. 2016. Koons, Jennifer. "Supreme Court Lifts Ban on Planting GM Alfalfa." New York Times, 21 June 2010, www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/06/21/21greenwire-supreme-court-lifts-ban-on-planting-gm-alfalfa -57894.html. Accessed 11 Oct. 2016.

Lappé, Anna, and Matthew Willse. "GMO Giant." Nation, 11 Sept. 2006, p. 32. Points of View Reference Center, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pwh&AN=22060247&site=pov-live. Accessed 11 Oct. 2016. McAuliff, Michael. "House Votes to Ban States from Labeling GMO Foods." Huffington Post, 23 July 2015, www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gmo-labels-food%5Fus%5F55b12fabe4b08f57d5d3f393. Accessed 11 Oct. 2016. Ostrander, Madeline. "Can GMOs Help Feed a Hot and Hungry World?" Nation, 1 Sept. 2014, pp. 23-27. Points of View Reference Center, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pwh&AN=97475081&site=pov-live. Accessed 11 Oct. 2016. "Should the FDA Adopt a Stricter Policy on Genetically Engineered Foods? Pro." Congressional Digest, Mar. 2001, pp. 76+. Points of View Reference Center, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pwh&AN=4483492&site=pov-live. Accessed 11 Oct. 2016. Wozniacka, Gosia. "Despite Losing in Liberal Oregon, Advocates of GMO Labeling Say They've Just Begun to Fight." Canadian Press. Canadian Press, 6 Nov. 2014. Web. 19 Nov. 2014. Websites and Digital Files Anderson, Monica. "Amid Debate over Labeling GM Foods, Most Americans Believe They're Unsafe." Fact Tank, Pew Research Center, 11 Aug. 2015, www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/08/11/amid-debate-over-labeling-gm-foods-most-america ns-believe-theyre-unsafe/. Accessed 14 Oct. 2016. Fama, Richard. "The New GMO Labeling Law: A Matter of Perspective." Food Safety News, Marler Clark, 8 Sept. 2016, www.foodsafetynews.com/2016/09/the-new-gmo-labeling-law-a-matter-of-perspective/. Accessed 14 Oct. 2016. Timmer, John. "USDA Wants Public Comments on Its Plan to Label GMO Foods." Ars Technica, 9 May 2018, arstechnica.com/science/2018/05/usda-wants-public-comments-on-its-plan-to-label-gmo-foods/. ~~~~~~~~ By Alex K. Rich and Tom Warhol

Tom Warhol is a naturalist, writer, and photographer living in Vermont. He holds a Master of Science degree in Forestry from the University of Massachusetts, and he has worked as a conservation professional for eight years, with the Massachusetts Riverways Program, the Nature Conservancy, and the American Chestnut Foundation. He is also the author of several books, including Biomes of Earth, a six-volume series, and three volumes in Benchmark Books' Animalways series: Eagles, Hawks, and Owls. Copyright of Points of View: Genetically Modified Foods is the property of Great Neck Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.