The Natural Society website had some awful, awful things to say about GMO’s. They claim that GMO’s are linked to more than 22 diseases. The study they use is from the Journal of Organic Systems. While this is a legitimate journal, and the study is peer-reviewed, we can already tell that they have a bias right? A bias against conventional agriculture. This study says that there is a significant compound called glyphosate which is applied to GMO’s regularly. While this is true, glyphosate is in a lot of herbicides, and it is applied to genetically modified/engineered crops. It’s applied to them, because they can withstand it. They’re bred to withstand it. They may be bred in a lab, but still. Anyways, the big deal is that glyphosate is potentially harmful to humans and animals. In large doses. As is everything. This study decided to grab on to that, and run. The study also shows that glyphosate residues are allowed on food. This might worry some of yall, but stick with me, it’s gonna be okay!!!! These residues (which can be explained here) are in parts per million (ppm). That’s really, really tiny. At these levels, glyphosate is safe. I’m not saying you should go around eating unwashed fruits and vegetables, but it’s not going to kill you if you do. The study tries to tell you that at these levels, glyphosate inhibits hormones and causes all kinds of problems. They state in this study that humans who are chronically ill show a significantly higher amount of glyphosate in their urine than healthy humans. Here’s the deal...when something is in your urine, that means your body is expelling it. If there are significant levels being excreted...how are they also inhibiting hormones? Sure, you could say that there’s so much glyphosate inhibiting endocrines that the amount expelled is just excess but the National Pesticide Information Center (NPIC) says otherwise. They say that glyphosate passes through the body quickly, and without changing into another chemical (or anything causing health issues) as the study above would have you believe.They also say that glyphosate, in salt form, regulates plant growth and ripens fruit which seems beneficial to me. The study from the journal also does not mention where they found out that glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor...so did they just make that up? That’s kind of crazy right?
Forbes magazine is all for GMOs however, and here’s why. By 2014 over 2,000 studies had been done proving that GMOs do not pose a threat to human health. A lot of the studies that find other results end up posting their articles in non-peer reviewed anti-GMO journals. Be careful what you read. Several anti-GMO campaigners self-publish books and articles which include anecdotes, personal stories, which aren’t research based at all. This is simply alarming. You wouldn’t go to a doctor and expect him to say, “well this happened to me as a kid and my grandma just slapped some tobacco on it, and it healed right up, so you should do that.” No! You go to a doctor expecting him to say, “New research shows that this medicine works for your health issues better than any other medicine with minimal side effects.” They back their medical decisions with facts. Researchers shouldn’t be any different. They have a PhD for crying out loud! You read in the last post that Dr. van Eenennaam studied 29 years of data on animals fed Genetically Engineered (GE) feed. Her study was reviewed, and other authors stated that there is no evidence that humans who eat animals that are fed GE feed are not harmed. Read this quote from Forbes, “Estimates of the numbers of meals consumed by feed animals since the introduction of GM crops 18 years ago would number well into the trillions. By common sense alone, if GE feed were causing unusual problems among livestock, farmers would have noticed. Dead and sick animals would literally litter farms around the world. Yet there are no anecdotal reports of such mass health problems.”This is from 2014. We have eaten trillions and trillions of meals since GMOs and GE feed were introduced. And, since I don’t have a PhD, I’m going to give my anecdote: I love buying food with GMOs. It makes me jump for joy when I see that food was produced even with partially GE products. Why then, if GMOs were so bad for us, am I not dead? Why are all of my college friends, who also love GMOs, still alive? Why are YOU still alive? You probably didn’t even know there was such a thing as GMOs in your food until 2010.
Are you convinced that GMOs are safe yet? If not, let’s take a look at one more article. In 2016 a new study was done. This study involved over 20 years of data, over 900 other publications, and more than 20 experts/researchers. It proved that, again, there is no health concern for humans or animals, and there is significant benefits to the agriculture industry in using GE crops. The U.S. FDA has ongoing research about GMOs, especially when new traits or technologies are used. They are often reviewed by the USDA and the EPA. Even in the European Union, where they highly regulate the use of GMOs, studies have been done that declare them safe for sale. There are so many reasons GMOs are used. Read this article to find out how beneficial they actually are. I have linked other studies below for you to compare, and contrast. I’ve also linked all the articles I quoted or used for this post. Please comment below if you have any questions, want more articles to compare, or if you just found this post insightful.
Have a great March, Agrarians!
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-tolerances
NPIC Glyphosate Fact Sheet
Natural Society Article https://sustainablepulse.com/2018/01/08/shocking-study-shows-glyphosate-herbicides-contain-toxic-levels-of-arsenic/#.Wplwb-jwY2x
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300483X16302645#fig0005
Parts Per Million conversions
Forbes 2014 Article on the trillion meal study
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2015/07/are_gmos_safe_yes_the_case_against_them_is_full_of_fraud_lies_and_errors.html
https://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/features/truth-about-gmos#1
http://www.organic-systems.org/journal/92/JOS_Volume-9_Number-2_Nov_2014-Swanson-et-al.pdf
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308814613019201
Comments
Post a Comment