So, I know that GMOs allow more food per acre, and therefore more people to be fed, and “non-GMO” food is going to be more expensive for no reason (other than other people’s paranoia). So what do I do if I WANT to buy food with GMOs? Can I assume it’s in pretty much everything that isn’t labeled “non-GMO”? Should I be writing letters to companies that use GMO food, thanking them for helping feed the world, to counter-balance all the crank letters they get about “Frankenfood,” or will I sound just as crazy?
Can I assume it’s in pretty much everything that isn’t labeled “non-GMO”?
That’s pretty much it. If it’s not labeled non-gmo, it’s most likely gmo.
If you want to be sure, go to Tractor Supply and buy some feed corn.
The tortillas you make from that are pretty much guaranteed GMO.
This applies to many processed foods.
Most fruits and vegetables are non-GMO.
The vast majority of fish and meat is non-GMO unless one wants to go bonkers over animals sometimes eating GM grain. In which case, stay away from other people because we’ve probably all eaten a corn chip or other GM product at one time or another and are also contaminated by the Evil DNA.
Just buy the cheaper products that are not labelled as GMO-free. If in fact the product is made from ingredients of which the GMO version is cheaper/more efficient, then the cheaper products will highly likely be made with the cheaper, efficient GMO ingredients. And if the product is not made from ingredients of which this is true, then why would you want to favour the GMO ingredients?
Over the past year or so, I’ve seen a few food packages that specifically say that the product contains GMOs. I can’t think of any specific examples, but it is clear that a few companies are going the “informed consent” route.
This is quite inaccurate.
Most common fruits and vegetables have been heavily genetically modified, for tens or even hundreds of years, to produce the fertile & flavorful varieties we eat now. If you looked at the original versions, before humans began breeding and cross-fertilizing them, you would hardly recognize the originals.
And it continues even now. At my school, the University of Minnesota, I have met the people who created the HoneyCrisp apple, the 5th most common apple now. But it didn’t even exist before 1974.
But that’s not at all what “Genetically Modified” means, as the phrase is commonly used. People have been selectively breeding things since antiquity, more or less. “Genetically Modified” refers more specifically to the modern technological practice of chemically tinkering with the DNA of organisms at the molecular level.
Unfortunately a lot of people have bought into the myth of GMO and the propaganda of large corporations.
I suggest you read
It’s a scientific book with a large number of references to peer-reviewed published scientific papers.
Quotes by reviewers:
One of the authors:
Michael Antoniou, PhD is a Reader in Molecular Genetics and Head of the Gene Expression and Therapy Group, Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics, King’s College London School of Medicine, UK. He has 34 years’ experience of using genetic engineering technology, including genome-editing tools, in the investigation of gene organization and control, with over 100 peer-reviewed publications. He holds inventor status on gene expression biotechnology patents. His discoveries in gene control mechanisms are being used for research as well as the development of diagnostic and therapeutic products for genetic disorders. Dr Antoniou has taken an active interest in the safety of GM crops and their associated pesticides.
What concerns me and many of my friends is that GMO crops are sterile, so a subsistence farmer (or any other farmer) has to buy seed from Monsanto or whoever and cannot use part of his crop to provide seed for next year. This makes farmers dependant on big corporations.
We also are learning much more about the need for biodiversity and how monoculture is a Bad Thing.
The problem here is that “GMO” is just as undefined as “Organic”.
Not at all. It’s clearly defined. Corporate interests would like people to think that it includes traditional selective breeding, in order to muddy the waters, but it does not.
GMO means that the DNA has been directly altered by genetic engineering.
The definition of GMO by the World Health Organization and the European Commission is that the organisms must be altered in a way that does “not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination”.
The EU ban is not due to being unscientific. It’s due to valid scientific concerns. The difference from the US is that EU regulatory agencies are not influenced by corporate interests.
Big Agra has also sued farmers who do keep their own seed and don’t buy from Big Agra when the GMO pollen fertilizes those plants, resulting in the farmers “stealing” the GMO product when really it wandered over to their fields on its own.
No, they aren’t.
Percy Schmeiser intentionally propagated RR Canola. Nobody has been sued over accidental pollination.
To the OP, the list of current GMO crops is here:
That does not tell you about market penetration though.
[Moderating]
Given that the OP, rather than just ask a straight question, has introduced the debate over the pros and cons of GMO food, let’s move this to Great Debates.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
On a related note, I’m vaguely looking forward to trying vat-meat.
Heck, even if GMOs never existed, the causes of world hunger would be political, not agricultural or scientific.
And what do you think the first step in selective breeding is? Alteration of the DNA. And when it doesn’t happen fast enough naturally, humans deliberately induce mutations. That’s how it’s been done since time before history. The only difference is that now, we’ve taken the blindfold off, and some people think that somehow makes it less safe?
I wouldn’t be so quick to trust that book. It appears, at least in Amazon’s mind, to be associated with the following books, all being advertised on the same page (including left-right scrolling):
**Unvaccinated: **why parents are choosing to not vaccinate…
**The Autism Vaccine **(claims vaccines cause autism)
Vaccine Epidemic (…corporate greed, etc…)
Healing and Preventing Autism, by that renowned doctor Jenny McCarthy
The Case against Fluoride (claims fluoride is hazardous waste and dangerous)
**WiFi & Cellphones’ Hidden Harms **by Joseph Mercola
Herbal Antibiotics, Alternatives for treating bacteria
Homeopathic Cell Salt Remedies
Lab 257, the government’s secret germ laboratory
Exposed, the Electronic Sickening of America (claims WiFi and cellphones are dangerous)
Altered Genes, Twisted Truth (claims GMOs are bad for you)
****Seeds of Deception ****(claims GMOs are bad for you)
Food Forensics (your food is full of “toxins,” and GMOs are bad for you)
Genetic Roulette (GMOs are bad for you)
Whitewash, the story of a weed killer…
Never Fear Cancer Again (how to prevent and cure cancer, a holistic approach. Cancer is caused by toxins)
Deadly Medicine & Organized Crime (claims Big Pharma (organized crime) is bad for you)
**Modified: **GMO Threat to our food, our land, etc.
Tripping Over Truth (claims everything we know about cancer is wrong)
The Toxin Solution (…hidden poisons in air, water, food, etc.)
Under an Ionized Sky (chemtrails, etc.)
Healing is Voltage (cure disease with electric current)
And no, I didn’t cherry-pick this list all that much, and I omitted titles that could not readily be analyzed as woo. I couldn’t find ANY with reliable science, or even a reasonable hint of such. And my list is only a subset of what I found.
My conclusion? Unless you are into holistic medicine, alternative medicine, homeopathy, toxin therapy, electric healing, McCarthy & Mercola, the linked book is worthless by association.