Pro GMO or No GMO?

With advancements in GMO foods, how are we supposed to think?



6/9/20222 min read

I read an interesting article just now on the new direction of GMO foods. And I'm even more on the fence than I was before I read it. To summarize, the companies that do the gene editing to create different GMO foods are looking to create more, create different and create better. They seek to eradicate certain diseases in plants, strengthen the nutritional value in plants, save money because certain GMO crop starters are expensive, and probably limitless other beneficial features and reasons.

They're also seeking to change plants enough to be able to dodge GMO regulations. They're looking to change the genome so much, that perhaps identifying aspects can't even be found or declared.

Genetic engineering has come so far, and has been so simplified that they're claiming anything is possible. At the end of the article, they claim even undergraduates in degree programs can begin to genetically modify plants. I don't know whether to have hope in the country's food supply or be terrified of it. Can I trust a corn plant that has been genetically modified to have double the ears of corn it produces to result in a price drop because of increased output? Or will that company just pocket the extra money?

Can I trust a new kind of oil that claims to reduce cholesterol and the risk of heart disease to be a healthier choice? Or will there be genetic material that harms me there instead/also?

Can I trust that a crop that is resistant to disease, resistant to drought, resistant to harmful bacteria also does not harm bees, butterflies and other critical parts to the ecosystem?

Is this going to be a case where things were developed too fast and before enough testing to where the risks could outweigh the benefits they seek?

Is is all a new money grab with no actual benefit to the consumer?

Is "playing God" going to fill us up with fake food that we aren't meant to eat?

These questions are all possibly a yes and regulatory controls are certainly not keeping up with the rate of development. And is that a good or a bad thing?

It's a topic I'd like to know more about, for my own health and to help yours, but digging for information feels like a black hole. The companies that develop it are only going to preach the good. The companies that oppose GMOs are going to continue to be distrustful. Both views have their reasons to be totally polarizing.

So how is a consumer that goes to Wegmans to buy bananas that never turn brown, going to ever be completely okay with their decision?I don't think that the companies releasing this food do testing on every aspect of human nutrition, or on ever aspect of its impact on the ecosystem. So digging for concrete information is going to prove fruitless (haha bad pun).

I think in this little rant, I've decided one thing. If these GMO companies really want to thrive, they need to be doing more to gain our trust. In a fact-checking culture, as often as they release a new food, they need to be release as much tested proof that it isn't causing harm. If anyone has anything else to contribute and deepen our knowledge on this topic, I'd welcome any links for more information. Concrete, tested, scientific and not based on politics or non-scientific opinion would be amazing. This is the original link to the article I'm talking about.