These health risks include infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, problematic insulin regulation, stomach problems, reduction in digestive enzymes, liver toxicity, allergic reactions, antibiotic resistance, cancer etc. Let me elaborate on a few of these health issues. Infertility: Studies done on animals showed that more than half of the babies of GM-fed mother rats died within 3 weeks. Also, the longer the mice were fed GM foods, the less babies they had and the smaller the babies were.
Also, GM fed rats had uterus and ovary changes, and by the 3rd generation, they were unable to have babies. In addition, about 2 dozen US farms reported that GE-fed pigs or cows developed sterility and could not reproduce. All these suggests infertility or reduced fertility and also a high risk of birth defects.
And we wonder why infertility rates are increasing daily in humans. It has also been known to be linked to breast cancer and prostate cancer. Recent studies show that IGF-1 is an important factor in the growth of breast, prostate, colon cancers. Once again, we wonder why the incidence of cancer is increasing. Liver toxicity: The liver is one of the important organs in the human body and is responsible for detoxification.
When this disadvantage for the consumer is relieved, by laws that are enforced, then the process will take on a much different approach than what is being used presently. Can you please clarify for me where the funding for this paper came from? Can you clafify what you plan to do when you recieve your doctrine degree? Lastly, who do you work for or intended to work for? I found this article extremely informative but do not agree with it. I am asking about funding because I am sure you are aware of funding that comes from the same position as the author and would recommend if anybody wanted to see a counter argument to this article to watch the moive GMO Roulette.
I believe it is beyond safe for me to say that there is an argument for both sides and somewhere in there the truith is. My objective is to find that truith from an unbiased source, which seems to be very challenging these days.
Thank you for your time. Hi Mark, Thanks for your comment! I agree with this article and everything that it is supporting. All the people do is extract a gene in that specific food. The author is trying to put dust in the eyes of the public. Every second person is getting cancer after eating GMO food. The true results are there to see. This happened after the introduction of GMO food. This is a laughable article and may be paid advertisement to buy more GMO and end up part of population control.
I am sure I will be able to find an article totally scientific but opposite to what the author wrote here to deceive the public. If GMO is safe why people are having an epidemic of Diabetes, thyroid problem, obesity, blood pressure, cardiovascular problems, and great cancer epidemic which started as every 49th person was diagnosed with cancer but now every other person has cancer.
I understand just GMO is not targetted attack on the body but almost everything that we used for life has been GM. For example water has chlorine and fluoride with hundreds of side effects, then air is full of planted and hundreds of chemical, then radiation from electronics we use, then all food we eat, then our brains are getting polluted with horrible news of crimes in the world, hardly you see good news of people who are heroes in daily life, they are not reported to promote goodness and human brotherhood.
Them the sun is causing cancer due to the hole over the north pole. Most of the cancer caused by what you state in your comment is your comment itself, it really is making me want to die with how you are just stating random things you found on the internet and I just have to say you have really made my day man, I appreciate being stupid for the sake of making my day better!
I only hope that they label all GMO foods that way I still have the choice to eat or not to eat. Being a vegan I read all lables. This one company that makes veggie meat also has it in it but then they also have caffeine in their meatballs.
Well we have been modifying food crops for a very long period of time by selecting the characteristics that we think are desirable. Just compare the original wild corn to the corn used by the Aztecs in Mexico when the Spaniards arrived. By the use of genetic modification we have speeded up the process. Introducing genes from unrelated species is new but there is s evidence that in nature there occurs a crossover of genes between unrelated species. One also has to take note that in nature many plants have toxins that are harmful to human health.
So when we genetically modify a plant there is a risk we might make the plant more toxic but that same risk exists in nature. Contrary to what some people would like to believe nature is not this benign force that is looking out for our interests. That is not good science. Probably what would bother me the most is pesticide resistance which translates into a heavier use of pesticides.
Fares, N. Ewen, S. Birch, A. Geoghegan, M. Majerus, J. McNicol, C. Hackett, A. Gatehouse, and J. Malatesta, M. Caporaloni, S. Gavaudan, M. Rocchi, S. Serafini, C. Tiberi, and G. Caporaloni, L. Rossi, S. Battistelli, M.
Rocchi, F. Tonucci, and G. Biggiogera, E. Manuali, M. Rochhi, B. Baldelli, and G. Histochemistry 47 4 : Pryme, I. Vecchio, L. Cisterna, M. Malatesta, T. Martin, and B. Prescott, V. Campbell, A.
Moore, J. Mattes, M. Rothenberg, P. Foster, T. Higgins, and S. Tudisco, R. Lombardi, F. Bovera, D. Cutrignelli, V. Mastellone, V. Terzi, L. Avallone, and F. Ermakova, I. Preliminary Studies. Sagstad, A. Haugland, A. Hansen, P. Olsvik, and G. Seralini, G. Cellier, and J. Boraldi, G. Finamore, A. Roselli, S. Britti, G. Monastra, R. Ambra, A. Turrini, and E. Velimirov, A. Binter, and J. Vienna, Austria.
Accessed July 22, Kilic, A. Cisterna, B. Flach, L. Vecchio, S. Barabino, S. Battistelli, T. Martin, M. Malatesta, and M. Primicerio, D. Hessen, and T. Trabalza-Marinucci, M. Chiaradia, G. Brandi, C. Rondini, L. Avellini, C. Giammarini, S. Costarelli, G. Acuti, C. Orlandi, and G. Sissener, N. Sanden, A. Bakke, A. Krogdahl, and G. Atremis, D. Spiroux, F. Roullier, D. Biological Sciences 5 7 : Aris, A. Clair, R. Carrnan, J. Vlieger, L. Ver Steeg, V. Sneller, G.
Robinson, C. Clinch-Jones, J. Haynes, and J. The above sources were taken directly from an article written by Sheldon Krimsky of Tufts. Please take a look for yourself:. Krimsky, Sheldon. To clarify I want to say that my above comment was only meant to show that GMO foods are safe to eat, but we should not accept this as the end of the debate.
Megan has done a fine job of synthesizing multiple studies that show how safe the GMO foods are for consumers, however we should not believe this is a closed book on GMO safety. More testing should be done, especially with long term studies that track changes over two or three year periods. Interesting how many people are defending GMOs on this board even though they have no personal investment in the topic…Or do they.. The only reason this topic is searched and therefore this article discovered is someone is either concerned about the safety of GMOs, wants to learn more about GMOs, or the person has a vested interest in the success of GMOs.
So to be on this board defending GMOs is questionable to say the least, particularly because there is not enough evidence to even make a claim about the safety of GMOs.
So making such a definitive claim is negligent and really suspicious. I have spoke with professors that casually speak of the risk a researcher poses to his or her career if they publish studies shining any negative light on GMOs. Thats actually incorrect Jacob. There is a significant amount of information backed by credible sources to indicate that health outcomes from non-GMO foods are the same as GMO foods.
She earned her B. The data starts in through , and GMOs were first introduced in So if GMO foods cause cancer or tumors or birth defects why did animal health actually improve? What I was trying to say with my above comment is that there is research on both sides of this argument and the data points to GMOs being safe for human consumption. However, there are still some studies that show otherwise so we need to continue to pursue that information. You will not be able to prove they are safe, you can only prove they are as safe as non-GMO foods, which is what the large majority of studies prove.
I suggest you take a look at the study in my above comment in red text. One more thing to add here, Jacob. I had to read multiple academic sources, multiple opinion articles, multiple articles from both sides of this argument and then produce a lengthy essay that combines all this information into one piece.
The reason I was putting this information up for others is because I know others have come to this article seeking information about GMO foods. I know many of those people are not in college or may not have a college degree.
I was attempting to put the information that I found up here in a concise manner to help others. It is completely up to you if you want to read the two studies that I have linked in red text , but if you are looking for more information just as I was then I hope what I found was helpful to you.
This article by Megan Norris was one of many sources of information that I used. For anyone else looking up the safety of GMO foods you should know the facts and do your own research. Thank god for the internet and being able to find out the truth. The aim is to make them better right? Anyway, this is how I see it.
A big thanks to the writer of this article. I am actually doing an assignment and have to compare different 4 articles to find which one do answer my question on GMOs. Wooow i found this as best and interesting. I didnt even have a knowledge on GMOS as im a commerce student but now im no more left out. Thanks to the internet. This is why places like Harvard need to be fact checked.
Now we have countless lawsuits against Monsanto for glyphosate poisoning and several lawsuits have been awarded millions in damages. Great job Ivy league! Who the globalist masters you serve? GMO make youre babys have downsindrome. Pls do not buy intto the lies that these people are spreading. Protect our future!!! There ya go! Maybe your lawyer can just shut down Harvard in its entirety. After this, they can get started on the process of shutting down her references and then their references and so on, all the way until they get to……….
Just tell your lawyer to shut down the internet. That may be easier. I think we all have to consider that GMOs are a new concept and that the data we have is not conclusive.
Even some sources admit that they do not know and cannot predict the long term effects of GMOs and according to studies made in , they were often wrong about the general safety of GMOs. This caused scientists to review their work, so to be honest this is a new subject that we sill cannot be certain about but in the end should be up to the consumer. Love your post! If you are not already, you most certainly should be a writer. Thanks for posting!
I disagree with GMOs because they prove facts about stuff I disagree with. I am also actually fearful of advancing technology and how far we have come as a society from my generations because things are changing and I am scared of change. The only reason I hate on this is that I am fearful of all this and that it will outlive us. I also get all my sources from very reliable sources such as blogs and webpages. This Karen above me is the only one I will ever agree with, good use of sarcasm, this is how it should be done.
I feel that the comments are providing more…realistic information than what this article is giving out. I am doing this research for an exam and i did not expect gen z rollin up in the comments. Hi, Thanks for sharing such an amazing post on GMO products. Above all of these, I was looking was something like this and find this very helpful. Thanks again for sharing such an amazing post!
Best Regards. Your email address will not be published. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email.
Currently you have JavaScript disabled. In order to post comments, please make sure JavaScript and Cookies are enabled, and reload the page. Click here for instructions on how to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Skip to content by Megan L. Norris Summary: As the prevalence of genetically modified organisms GMOs continues to rise, there has been an increasing public interest for information concerning the safety of these products. Uhh Jerk- You never had to do that! They were just complimenting the article. You are a genius. Smarter than most of the people on this website.
Exactly Eunice!! They made by gaming places. In essence, GMOs increase pesticide use and pesticide use is harmful to the environment. Good luck with your research.
Er… Where did this come from? Basically, Silence Wench. The process has radically improved over the last 12, years. Figure 2. Glyphosate usage concentration in the U.
While Roundup has not tested as toxic to humans and other mammals, the longer it has been on the market, the worse its effects on soil health and long-term plant fecundity appear. In addition, Roundup Ready plants may not allow necessary micronutrients to be absorbed by animals consuming them and may also play a part in the recent die-off of bees the seriousness of which cannot be overstated.
Aside from the biological concerns, there are also economic ones about which any farmer is certainly well-acquainted. It is not too early to consider that the amber waves of grain in the Midwest might also be at risk of drought or conversely that the risk of crop-harming downpours — another manifestation of climate change — will also negatively affect grain yields.
Figure 3. Groundwater withdrawal rates in It takes roughly 10, years to recharge water Source: National Atlas via Wikipedia. In light of these very sobering conditions, it is clear that agricultural technology should be focusing on increasing the resiliency of our food crops, rather than fine-tuning them to maximize yield in a narrow ecological sweet spot.
There have been a few studies claiming damage to human or animal health from specific foods that have been developed using GM. The claims were not about the GM method itself, but about the specific gene introduced into the crop, or about agricultural practices associated with the crop, such as herbicide treatments.
The statistical analysis and methodology of these studies have been challenged. All reliable evidence produced to date shows that currently available GM food is at least as safe to eat as non-GM food. An animal feeding trial of GM tomatoes modified to produce high levels of antioxidants showed the GM tomatoes reduced the levels of cancer. This is not because the tomatoes are GM, but rather because they produce antioxidants, which are known to reduce cancer.
0コメント