Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have become part of our life. They are widely used in medicine: using artificially altered genes, scientists are trying to treat cancer and hemophilia. Many vaccines, enzymes, hormones, antibodies, and insulin are genetically modified.
But most actively GMOs are used in agriculture. With the help of this technology, scientists change the DNA of a plant or animal so as to increase yield, disease resistance, nutrient content and taste.
How does genetic modification of an organism occur?
Schematically, it looks like this: a separate gene is taken that is responsible for the desired property of the organism. With the help of enzymes, it is placed in the so-called. a vector is usually a nucleic acid molecule. The vector is transferred into the organism to be modified. Then unsuccessful modifications are discarded, and successful ones go into production.
It would seem, what's wrong with that? Nevertheless, a whole heap of legends and horror stories have already formed around GMOs. Critics of the technology argue that by consuming foods grown through gene modification, we risk getting cancer, becoming infertile, stupid, obese and even mutating. Let's try to figure out if all this is true.
Per
Promotional video:
American scientists sing the hosannas of GMOs in both the scientific and popular press. Some of the advances in technology are truly impressive. Genetic editing has created swine resistant pigs and drought tolerant wheat. The use of drought-resistant maize has helped alleviate some of the hunger problem in Africa.
Fields planted with GM plants use 37% less fertilizer. Their average yield is higher than that of traditional crops by 22%. The income of farmers using GM crops increased by 68%.
GMO fruits include sweet pink pineapples, rich in lycopene, which reduces the risk of prostate cancer, golden rice, rich in beta-carotene, and black tomatoes, which contain anthocyanins - substances that reduce the risk of cancer and diabetes.
What's so terrible about editing genes? People have been doing this throughout their history, say GMO advocates. All the great breeders - Michurin, who grew apples, and Count Orlov, who bred trotters - did, in fact, the same thing. They changed the genes of plants and animals, crossing the right individuals and developing the right breeds and varieties. It’s just that earlier this process stretched for decades. And now it is carried out "in a test tube" in a matter of months.
Against
The opponents of GMOs have a simple objection to all this. Traditionally, mutations of animals and plants took place in real time. Noticing an undesirable deviation, breeders rejected a low-quality specimen. So, over the millennia, the yield, disease resistance and taste of agricultural products have gradually and safely increased.
In vitro mutations are progressing rapidly. Having “ordered” any one property from a future plant or animal, scientists simply cannot estimate what side effects this mutation can bring with it. Having not passed the test of time, genetically modified seeds and individuals are beginning to be widely used in agriculture. Statisticians simply do not have time to track all the problems that can arise in GM crops.
The widespread use of GMOs began just twenty years ago. And so far we still do not have reliable data on whether they are capable of harming a person or not. There are no proven examples that genetically modified foods have caused any mutations in people who consume them. However, there are no guarantees that they will not appear later, maybe already in representatives of the next generations.
Manure by Monsanto, or Europe vs USA
For decades, European scientists have opposed the use of GMOs in agriculture, publishing hundreds of studies that genetically modified corn can cause cancer, and GM tomatoes can cause allergies. But there is an interesting intrigue here.
The fact is that most of the corporations that produce GMOs are American. They often make their GM crops sterile - unable to reproduce. This is done in order to bind the consumer to himself. Having bought once GM wheat and fertilizers suitable for it, the farmer will not be able to use it for seeds next year, but will have to buy it from the corporation again. Then the corporation monopolizes the market and will be able to set any price for its goods. Gradually, these giant TNCs for the production of GMOs will be able to take control of the entire agriculture of the Earth.
Therefore, fighting against GMOs, the governments of European countries, first of all, protect their food security. Hence the Greens rallies, the rowdy Greenpeace rallies and the sumptuously orchestrated protests of farmers who regularly dump manure onto the streets to protest the American corporation Monsanto, the world's most hated GMO producer.
European governments are tirelessly sponsoring their farmers and organizing campaigns to target American GMO producers.
The curiosity of this situation lies in the fact that Europe itself has its own powerful producers of GMOs - German KBC and Bauer, whom, as we understand, no one criticizes in the EU.
Many non-European countries are also fighting against American corporations. In Brazil, China, India, Russia, the cultivation of genetically modified plants and animals is either directly prohibited or severely restricted. At the same time, these countries are encouraging their own research in the field of GMO technologies.
The conclusion from all this is quite simple - if GM technologies are really capable of changing the properties of certain goods, improving their consumer qualities and, at the same time, reducing manufacturers' costs, GMOs will be produced under any conditions and any government rhetoric.
What to do?
Where to go to the common consumer who wants to eat tasty, safe and preferably not very expensive?
Until it is proved that the altered genes of food consumed by a person are capable of influencing his own genome, it will not be possible to hear an unambiguous answer to this question. Simple scientific logic suggests that this is impossible by definition. However, opponents of GMOs are in no hurry to accept this as an axiom, insisting on their own way of thinking.
Since the point has not been put in this issue, all those who doubt the safety of GMOs should protect themselves from the consumption of modified products. There are no other ways to calm down, above all, your own nerves.
Here are some tips on how to behave for anyone who doesn't believe in the safety of GMOs:
firstly, in this case it is advisable to give preference to domestic products. Russian farmers and large farms rarely use GMOs.
secondly, you should carefully look at the labels - there are several varieties of potatoes, corn, soybeans among GM crops permitted for use in Russia. Information about this should be on the packaging. Whether or not to buy a product containing GMO additives is a personal matter for each consumer.
thirdly, if there is no way to refuse a questionable purchase, or to buy a Russian one, from imported products, you should choose those that are not produced in the USA or Canada, but in Europe - the local authorities strictly monitor the absence of GMOs in them.
fourth, do not believe in publicity stunts. Do not rush to buy salt or mineral water just because the packaging says: "Does not contain GMOs!" By definition, there can be no GMOs in any salt or mineral water - these are purely mineral substances in which there are simply no genes.
But if "No GMO!" written on the sausage, this information needs to be checked in more detail. Most sausages contain soy, the vast majority of which is genetically modified. So here again you need to carefully read the label and ask the seller about the composition.
Once again, we recall that all these recommendations apply only to those who, for some reason, believe in the dangers of GMOs, while in fact the ability of the modified genes of consumed foods to change the genome of the person consuming them has not been proven.
Common misconceptions
Many horror stories about GMOs have long been debunked. It is unambiguously clear that they do not threaten us with infertility. Yes, many GM plants are sterile, but there are also many such plants in nature - for example, bananas and seedless grapes.
But man, fortunately, does not copy the DNA of what he eats. By eating a fruitless fruit, we will not become sterile, just as by eating an egg, we will not begin to lay.
You should not blame GMOs for your allergies either - much more often it is caused by fertilizers that processed fruits and vegetables, or preservatives, with the help of which sellers try to preserve the beautiful appearance of fruits.
A lot of noise was made at one time by the research of the French scientist Gilles-Eric Séralini, who fed the experimental rats with products of the Monsanto company and registered a sharp increase in the number of cancerous tumors in them. The company did everything to disavow its results. However, Séralini filed a lawsuit defending his scientific reputation, and so far wins all the courts.
Research colleagues questioned Séralini's findings. They believe that for his experiments he chose the breed of rats in which tumors develop naturally. This does not allow us to consider his experiments 100% reliable. As we said above, the hysteria around GMOs is deliberately provoked by the EU authorities.
In general, the main thing is not to panic ahead of time. Too recently we have been consuming GMOs to draw any conclusions about their real impact on humans.
Victoria Nikiforova