Post comments on my Synthesis Draft

GMO Safety
Hunter Brown
University of Iowa







Introduction
For twelve millennia humans have crossed-breed the best of two crops or animals in the hopes of spawning a better version of the two.  It is how we get a diversity of crops and livestock such as bok choi, bananas, corn, domesticated horses, and cows.  Today, we have accelerated and expanded upon artificial selection to the point where we can add traits form one organism to another directly.  This advancement in technology has given us new farming techniques, treatment, and even new organisms.  Genetically modified organisms (GMO) are any living things whose genetic information has been altered through genetic engineering.  This can be brought through gene therapy, artificial selection, or shooting ultraviolet light at a plant to induce mutations.  Changes introduced to crops can give them the ability to be drought resistance, pesticide/herbicide resistance, and more nutrition.  On the other hand, some are afraid that introducing new genetic information onto our food can hurt consumers, damage the ecosystem, or simply is a waste of time.  We must ask ourselves, are GMO foods safe to eat, nutritional, and easy to grow for consumers?  Specific areas of concern on experts’ minds are the safety of GMO consumption, the nutrition factor of GMOs, and how genetically modified (GM) crops affect their environment.

Benign Effects on Humans
Many of the experts in the field say that GMOs, when eaten by humans, are completely safe (Freedman, 2013; Williams, 2018; Verma, 2011; de Santis 2018).  Some articles did raise concern that herbicide/pesticide residue left on GM crops can hurt the consumer, especially if the use of the substance continues to rise (Ludwig, 2018; Williams, 2018).
Firstly, we need not worry of altered DNA merging with human DNA. Horizontal gene transfer, as it is called, is as unlikely to happen from eating a GMO than it is from eating conventional foods or even organic foods (Freedman, 2013).  The US federal government does not require GMO labels on foods and organizations have taken the initiative to add non-GMO labels to their products.  For the 325 million people in the US eating three meals a day that is most likely genetically modified.  So far there has not been one verified case of a person getting sick from GMOs (Freedman, 2013).  In addition, the field of genetic engineering is relatively new and is constantly testing genes of any given organism in the world and studying the effects a gene has on an organism’s genome.  Many scientists believe that it is because of this depth of study into the science that GMOs are the safest food to eat (Williams, 2018).  Although ineffective remnants of genes can be detected in liver, spleen, kidney, blood, and muscle of mammals, they are never found in milk or egg products in tests using animals fed with GM soy, maize, and cottonseed.  The researchers have found small fragments of recombinant DNA in milk samples, but it was dismissed as fecal or airborne contamination of viruses and bacteria (de Santis, 2018).  Nonetheless, viruses and foreign bodies have added to animal and human genomes for millions of years where they too are innocuous.
Crossing genes from one organism to another have fueled the fear of introducing allergenic proteins in foods that are once thought safe for people with allergies.  The plan to incorporate a gene from Brazilian nuts into soybeans was scrapped people feared allergies will worsen (Verma, 2018).  The fear seems inconsistent with what was studied in Bt crops, crops that can create the Bt protein which target and kill larvae infesting the plant.  This protein is made when the cry gene is treated to crop seeds.  One crop is cotton; it is primarily grown for its fibers, but the cotton seed oil is extracted for consumption.  The oil itself contains no Bt proteins, leaving it harmless to any living things once it is out of the crop.  Outside of cotton, corn and potatoes have been studied thoroughly with wild mammals, livestock, and human safety tests where it was concluded that mammals lack the receptors to bind the Bt proteins and our digestive system makes the protein ineffective at harming humans (Verma, 2011; de Santis, 2018).  Contrarily, when mice are fed Bt potatoes do develop stomach lesions, liver stress, reproductive failure, and allergic responses in mice.  These effects and higher metabolic activity is shown in rabbits (Verma, 2011).  More study should be directed to the effects of GMO products on people with circulatory problems or digestive issues to see if this study has any relevance to human health.

Nutritional Benefits
Many articles that investigate the nutrient level of GMOs agree that GMOs are more nutrient dense, helps administer vaccines, allow livestock reach amino acid needs, and decrease fatty acid intake (Verma, 2011; de Santis, 2018; Freedman 2013; Williams, 2018). 
When modified proteins are added to foods, only one or two are used at a time and each one is closely studied by the industry.  It is because of persistent tests of GMOs that makes them safe for consumers (Williams, 2018).  Little by little, scientists add on to modified foods to better suit them towards the consumer.  One notable example of this happening in real life is the golden rice, a crop that has higher beta-carotene.  Beta-carotene is a precursor of Vitamin A which many children around the world lack and risk blindness because of it (Williams, 2018).  Because rice is a staple of many dishes around the developing world, golden rice can have a positive effect on the nutritional balance of the population.  Studies have included adding iron to other food staples to help children grow and learn more effectively.  These attributes come from adding the traits of Agrobacterium into the rice which allows production of enzymes making the beta-carotene and iron (Verma, 2011).  Foods engineered to have more nutritional content are studied carefully and show a positive impact on the nutritional needs of the people.
Aside from vitamins, traits derived from a vaccine can be added to potatoes to help people get vaccinated for cholera.  The potato can last longer in dry storage than a vaccine in controlled, sterile environments which is impractical when it needs to be shipped to villages.  The potato can be grown in those villages, where the people can cook the crop and eat it.  The potatoes help the body crate cholera-resistant antibodies, and the effects are no different than getting a vaccination shot (Verma, 2011).  We can also change the amount of starch in potatoes to curb obesity in industrialized nations.  A starchier potato absorbs less grease when fried, making French fries “healthier” the same way canola and soybeans can be modified to make less saturated oils.  Scientist are also working on ways to modify the production of sucrose to fructan, which tastes like sugar but is not digestible (Verma, 2011).  Specific changes to our food allows us to have healthier food grown in our fields rather than rely on the thousands of modifications that occurs in conventional crops.

GMO Farming
GMO farming has shown improved yields (Norero, 2018) and boost economic prosperity in developing countries (Faheri, 2017), but concerns of pollination from GM crops to pollen carriers and unmodified plants can have a serious impact on the ecosystem surrounding a GM farm (Ludwig, 2018).
It should be stated first that growing GM crops alone will not eradicate poverty.  GM and conventional farming do have a higher economic performance than organic farming where any savings made by the farmers are passed down to the consumer. This is indicative from heightened economic capital in Indian and Pakistani families, where more cost-effective farming and higher yields made food cheaper (Faheri, 2017).  GM crops can be grown in a diversity of environments due to drought resistance and pestilence resistance as opposed to organic crops which are limited where they can be grown to maintain true organic standards (Faheri, 2017).
This does not mean that GM farms should be established willy-nilly.  In places where insect-resistant crops were introduced but resistance-management practices were not implemented, insects have adapted to be resistant to the GM crops.  Sustainable farming where the treated crops are used correctly show that GM crops have allowed an average increase in agricultural yield by 22 percent and increased farmers’ profits by 68 percent, with profit margins even larger in developing countries.  Globally, more food is made with less land from the combined effects of increased crop yield and more food products per plant (Norero, 2018). 
Harmful proteins induced by gene therapy is harmless to humans, but some GM crops come with additional herbicide that must be sprayed post-planting season.  The residue of this added chemical does show measurable effects on the ecosystem.  A common spray used on crops is Monsanto’s flagship product RoundUp which contains the weed killing ingredient glyphosate.  This also includes adjuvants, which enhances the effects of glyphosate, and surfactants, which breaks cell membranes.  Although these factors change the toxicity levels of Roundup, they are not studied because they are considered inactive chemicals (Ludwig, 2018).  When tested on human cells, glyphosate-containing products are 250 times more toxic than glyphosate alone.  Even tests on placental cells from healthy pregnant women show that the chemical changes the hormonal balance of the cells.
Regardless, the use of glyphosate is unrestricted, and the continued use of the product is proportional to the amount of GM crops we grow (Ludwig, 2018).  This is concerning as the residue eft behind on unwashed crops can carry the toxic effects on organisms consuming the treated crop.  The surfactant chemicals have shown to kill 96-100% of amphibian infants and 68-86% of amphibian juveniles (Ludwig, 2018). Monarch butterflies are indirectly affected by the glyphosate treatment through the killing of milkweed.  RoundUp is a non-discriminant herbicide, so it will kill any plant not resistant to glyphosate.  Milkweed, which butterflies use for laying eggs and mating, is killed by the spread of glyphosate.  From 1999 to 2009, milkweed population in the Midwest dropped by 58% followed by an 81% drop in Monarch egg production in the Midwest (Ludwig, 2018).  The scope of the spraying goes beyond keeping the crops safe and can cause sweeping collateral damage surrounding the crop field.  As stated in the Norero article, it seems that responsible farming is needed to protect the crops and the ecosystem.  It may be worthwhile to use Bt crops instead of using RoundUp ready crops to protect the ecosystem, the crop fields, and the consumer from the harm of chemical residue.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the GMO foods we have now are just as safe and more nutritious than unmodified foods.  Gene therapy has safely made a positive impact on crops and, from the studies done on humans thus far, shows little to no reactions in humans.  The biggest concern brought up in the reading was spraying GM crops with additional chemicals.  Much of the articles look at agree the residue left on crops are highly toxic to not only pests, but to the consumer as well.  Looking into GM farming, GM crops has greater yield and utility than organic or conventional farming.  This boon shows promise in the aid for farmers in developing countries.  We should keep in mind the addition of RoundUp and other pesticides can do further damage to the ecosystem and responsible farming practices should be taken in order to establish consistent crop yields.  Further studies can be directed towards humans with circulatory problems, or digestive ailments and how GMOs affect their bodies.  It seems studies show humans can digest GMOs. Now more resources should be directed to specific areas of the human body and how GMOs react to these issues.  On the topic of farming, would urban farming be sustainable for GM crops?  Urban farming may negate the ecological issue of pesticides and should also keep the crops away from unwanted pests. 














References
Ludwig, K. (2018). Is our environment ready for Roundup? Investigation of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and their indirect effects on the environment (Thesis). Retrieved from https://aura.alfred.edu/bitstream/handle/10829/10832/Ludwig%2c%20Kaitlin%202018.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Norero, D. (2018). GMO crops have been increasing yield for 20 years, with more progress ahead. Cornell Alliance for Science. Retrieved from https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2018/02/gmo-crops-increasing-yield-20-years-progress-ahead/
de Santis, B., Stockhofe, N., Wal, J. M., Weesendorp, E., Lallès, J. P., Dijk, J., Kok, E., De Giacomo, M., Einspanier, R., Onori, R., Brera, C., Bikker, P., der Meulen, J., Kleter, G. (2018). Case studies on genetically modified organisms (GMOs): Potential risk scenarios and associated health indicators. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 117(4), 36-65.
Taheri, F., Azadi, H., D’Haese, M. (2017). A world without hunger: organic or GM crops? Sustainability, 9(4), 580. Doi: 10.3390/su9040580
Verma, C., Nanda, S., Singh, R. K., Singh, R. B., Mishra, S. (2011). A review on impacts of genetically modified food on human health. The Open Nutraceuticals Journal, 4, 3-11.
Williams, F. (2018). The surprising truth about GMOs. Fitness. Retrieved from https://www.fitnessmagazine.com/recipes/healthy-eating/nutrition/gmo-facts/
Freedman, D. H. (2013). The truth about genetically modified food. Scientific American. Retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-truth-about-genetically-modified-food/