10/09/2024 / By Olivia Cook
Bioengineered foods and genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are commonly confused with each other, but they have different meanings. “Bioengineered” describes food and products that are enhanced with scientific techniques to add particular traits. In contrast, “GMOs” involve changing the genetic makeup of animals, plants or microbes in ways that do not occur naturally using methods like genetic engineering.
Some notable issues related to the consumption of GM foods and products include the following:
Genetic modifications can transfer allergens from one food to another. For instance, a study published in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) revealed that soybeans engineered with a Brazil nut gene caused allergic reactions in people who are nut-sensitive. This led to the withdrawal of some products due to this serious risk. Without proper labeling, people with allergies can unknowingly consume these harmful ingredients.
GM food and products might also introduce new allergens. The genetic changes can create novel proteins not previously in the human diet, potentially triggering allergic responses. Despite warnings from U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) scientists about this risk, mandatory long-term testing for new allergens is not required, leaving many consumers, especially children, at risk of severe allergic reactions.
GM foods and products could potentially contribute to antibiotic resistance, making it harder to treat infections. According to the Food Standards Agency, most GM foods contain “antibiotic resistance markers,” which help identify successful genetic modifications. However, introducing these markers into the food supply might render essential antibiotics, like ampicillin, ineffective against bacterial infections. This concern led several European countries, including Britain, to ban certain GM crops for fear of the spread of antibiotic resistance. Despite warnings from scientists, the FDA has continued to allow these markers in GM foods even though public health experts view them as a significant threat.
In 1993, the FDA approved the use of genetically engineered recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) to boost milk production in cows, assuring consumers of its safety. However, Canada and Europe later banned the treatment due to concerns about animal and human health. Research has shown that dairy from rBGH-treated cows has higher levels of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), a hormone linked to breast, colon and prostate cancers. While the FDA overlooked studies showing that IGF-1 can survive digestion and enter the bloodstream – increasing cancer risk – the American Cancer Society states there is no current evidence linking GMOs to cancer and more long-term research is needed.
A study published in The Lancet by Dr. Arpad Pusztai and Stanley W.B. Ewen, funded by the Scottish government, investigated the effects of GM potatoes containing the biopesticide Bacillus thuringiensis (B.t.) on rats. The research found that rats consuming these potatoes experienced negative impacts on their immune function, metabolism and organ development. Although the biotechnology industry criticized Pusztai’s work, they haven’t provided any studies to disprove his findings. Additionally, 22 leading scientists have supported the validity of animal tests linking GM foods to immuno-suppression.
Genetic engineering can reduce the nutritional value of food. In 1992, FDA scientists warned that altering foods genetically might lead to “undesirable changes in nutrient levels.” They highlighted the risk that these changes could go unnoticed without specific testing. Despite these concerns, the FDA chose not to require mandatory testing for nutritional content in GM foods.
GM foods are unstable by nature. The process of inserting new genes into food is unpredictable, with no way to ensure the added genetic material doesn’t create harmful effects. This randomness means that each gene insertion could potentially turn safe food into something toxic.
FDA scientists were aware of this risk before setting their policy of no mandatory testing. They warned that genetic engineering could increase known toxins, introduce new ones, or cause foods to absorb more environmental toxins, like heavy metals and pesticides. Despite these warnings, the FDA chose to ignore the potential dangers and didn’t require toxicological testing for GM foods, prioritizing industry interests over food safety.
GMOs pose several environmental risks, including:
Visit GMO.news for more stories like this.
Watch the following video about “GMOs: Exposing industry and government lies about the safety of the genetically engineered foods you’re eating – Conspiracy Conversations.”
This video is from the Flyover Conservatives channel on Brighteon.com.
GMOs are harmful, should be avoided at all costs – study.
GMOs are killing us: Facts you probably don’t know.
Sneaky QR code labeling HIDES GMOs in food.
Sources include:
Tagged Under:
agriculture, antibiotic resistance marker, bioengineered food, biotechnology, dangerous, diseases, Ecology, food science, gene manipulation, gene-transfer, generically modified organism, GMO, mutation, unhealthy
This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author
COPYRIGHT © 2017 GENETIC LUNACY