The Safety of Genetically Modified Foods
More thoroughly studied, regulated and understood than any crop or food in history, genetically modified foods and crops are recognized by experts and regulatory authorities worldwide as being as safe as crops and foods produced through traditional methods. More than 25 Nobel Prize winners and 3,400 prominent scientists have expressed their support for the advantages of genetically modified foods and crops as a "powerful and safe" way to improve agriculture and the environment.
More than 1 trillion meals have been consumed with 0 reliably documented human or animal safety issues.
More than 1 trillion meals have been consumed with 0 reliably documented human or animal safety issues.
Related Article
EXPERTS CONFIDENT IN THE SAFETY OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS
Rigorous Testing and Global Regulatory Processes Ensure Safety
More thoroughly studied, regulated and understood than any crop or food in history, genetically modified foods and crops are recognized by experts and regulatory authorities worldwide as being as safe as crops and foods produced through traditional methods. In fact, experts estimate more than 1 trillion meals containing ingredients from biotech crops have been consumed over the last decade with no reliable documentation of any food safety issues for people or animals.
"As a scientist working with biotechnology, I know the scientific side all the advantages and possibilities," says Dr. Luciana Di Ciero, a plant pathologist at the University of Sγo Paulo in Brazil who has carefully evaluated the pros and cons of genetic engineering. "As a mother, I can say that I feel very safe with biotechnology. ... I have great faith in this technology."
To ensure the quality and safety of genetically modified foods, rigorous testing must demonstrate that the genetically modified food is as safe to consume as an existing food with the same compositional and nutritional characteristics. Specifically, researchers look for changes in allergenicity, toxicity, nutrient composition and level, unintended effects, and the safety of proteins included with the transgene.
In addition to these compositional analyses and safety studies, researchers conduct comprehensive tests to assess agronomic performance and environmental consequences. The data generated from all of these studies is then submitted to regulatory agencies worldwide for review.
"The EPA, and the USDA, and the Food and Drug Administration have a very precise protocol through which a scientist or a private company needs to go to assure safety," describes Dr. Roger Beachy, a plant pathologist and president of the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center in the United States. "The degree of scrutiny that each variety will receive is enormous.
"The Japanese have a criteria for safe food. The European Union and their countries have a certain set of standards. And, we have a set of standards. Those are well agreed upon," continues Dr. Beachy. "The issue of whether or not
a crop that is developed through biotechnology is in fact safe or not safe it's not the issue. It's whether or not it's on the market or not, and whether or not the consumers will have access to it."
"Only when we're sure that a product will not cause any problems ... can it go to the market," says Dr. Di Ciero. "The testing is much stricter than for conventional foods."
In a 2000 report, a committee of the National Academies noted, "The committee is not aware of any evidence that foods on the market are unsafe to eat as a result of genetic modification," and other groups have reached similar conclusions. In fact, more than 25 Nobel Prize winners and 3,400 prominent scientists have expressed their support for the advantages of genetically modified foods and crops as a "powerful and safe" way to improve agriculture and the environment. Numerous international organizations also have endorsed the health and environmental safety of genetically modified crops, including the Royal Society (UK), National Academy of Sciences (USA), the World Health Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the European Commission, the French Academy of Medicine, and the American Medical Association.
"So we can't just harshly and violently oppose this technology when we know that it can work for our farmers," says Dr. Ruth Oniang'o, a member of the Kenyan Parliament and strong proponent of the use of food biotechnology throughout Africa. "Because the people who are opposed to these technologies are not the farmers themselves they are people who can afford food."
© 2007 Monsanto Company. All rights reserved. The copyright holder consents
to the use of this material and the images in the published context only and solely for
the purpose of promoting the benefits of agricultural biotechnology.
Video Transcript
Pedro Lerνn
Farmer, Spain
To the people that don't want to use biotechnology, I tell them not to be afraid,
to open up, to listen, to see what happens with biotechnology the progress
that it means.
Luciana Di Ciero,
Ph.D.
Plant Pathologist
ESALQ, University of Sγo Paulo, Brazil
As a scientist working with biotechnology, I know the scientific side
all the advantages and possibilities. As a mother, I can say that I feel
very safe with biotechnology. ... I have great faith in this technology.
Klaus Ammann, Ph.D.
Botanist
University of Bern, Switzerland
I believe in this technology because I have studied it in thousands of papers.
And I have not seen a single really permanent negative impact.
The Honorable Ruth
Oniang'o, Ph.D.
Member, Parliament of Kenya
So we can't just harshly and violently oppose this technology when we
know that it can work for our farmers.
Because the people who are opposed
to these technologies are not the farmers themselves they are people who
can afford food.
Per Pinstrup-Andersen,
Ph.D.
Agricultural Economist
Cornell University, United States
Every minute that we sit here, 10 preschool children will die from hunger and
malnutrition.
If you add that up on an annual basis, it's about six million
preschool kids who die unnecessarily.
That's not reversible. So, we have
to compare the benefits with the risks. And even if there were some risks
and we haven't found any yet
they would have to be compared to the benefit
of taking that risk.
Dr. Di Ciero
The risk lies in not using biotechnology, ... in not utilizing the benefits
for both the environment and society, ... in not using science to solve our
problems of hunger, malnutrition, inhospitable areas where it's difficult
to farm.
The Honorable Dick
Taverne
Member, House of Lords
United Kingdom Parliament
Look at American experience on this: 280 million people eating genetically
modified crops, and
there's no evidence of any harm to health.
Mary Lee Chin, M.S., R.D.
Health and Nutrition Communications Consultant, United States
Because of the regulation, the study, the research and the development
that has occurred in food biotechnology that gives me confidence that what
I feed my family in my own home is safe food.
Roger Beachy, Ph.D.
Plant Pathologist
Donald Danforth Plant Science Center, United States
The EPA, and the USDA, and the Food and Drug Administration have a very precise
protocol through which a scientist or a private company needs to go to assure
safety.
The degree of scrutiny that that variety will receive is enormous.
Elibio Rech, Ph.D.
Molecular Biologist
Embrapa, Brazil
No doubt it is a very safe technology. This regulation that was developed to
deal with biotechnology is extremely strict
to make sure that every product
that gets to the market is safe.
Dr. Di Ciero
These products ... are tested. They are tested from the beginning in the lab.
After that, this plant goes to a greenhouse where it is analyzed agronomically.
... Then, these plants go to the field small experimental areas both for
agronomic analysis and environmental analysis. ... If the plant will be used
as food, ... all tests for allergies and toxicity are done. ... And only
when we're sure that a product will not cause any problems ... can it go
to the market. ... The testing is much stricter than for conventional foods.
Dr. Beachy
The Japanese have a criteria for safe food. The European Union and their
countries have a certain set of standards. And, we have a set of standards.
Those are well agreed upon. The issue of whether or not
a crop that is developed
through biotechnology is in fact safe or not safe it's not the issue. It's
whether or not it's on the market or not, and whether or not the consumers
will have access to it.
Bob
Fiddaman
Farmer, United Kingdom
Science is a positive thing. It's a plus factor not a negative scare
factor.
You know, you're standing on an ex-GM site. Where are these super
weeds that we were told we couldn't control? It's nonsense. And so are a lot
of the things that were there as scares. I think we've been able to get physical
evidence that it's all wrong.
Dr. Rech
These products have been sold for more than 10 years, and there is no evidence
of harmful effects for the environment, animal or human health.
This is a
safe technology.
Paul
Aasness
Farmer, United States
If I knew that biotech was hazardous to the environment or to humans,
I wouldn't raise it. ... But the science is behind us. ...
... All the research, all the data, everything that we have at our disposal
is in our favor. There is no damage. ... Believe in solid science, believe
in facts, believe in truth.
© 2007 Monsanto Company. All rights reserved. The copyright holder consents
to the use of this material and the images in the published context only and
solely for the purpose of promoting the benefits of agricultural biotechnology.
Close This Window
Send To Your Printer
Subscribe
Printer Friendly
Send to a Friend
Video Gallery
French farmers discuss the benefits of GM crops and explain why they think the country needs to reevaluate and adopt plant biotechnology.
