Consumer Reports: Breaking down the GMO debate
It's a growing controversy: Should foods containing genetically modified organisms, which are created in a lab by altering the genetic makeup of a plant or an animal, always have packaging notifying consumers of that fact?
Ninety-two percent of Americans believe that these foods — widely found in kitchens across the country — should be labeled before they're sold, according to a recent nationally representative survey of 1,004 people from the Consumer Reports National Research Center.
How can you make buying decisions that are best for you and your family? Consumer Reports helps you separate fact from fiction.
Are GMOs bad for my health?
Those who support using GMOs point out that Americans have been eating foods containing them for more than 15 years and that there's no credible evidence that people have been harmed. But saying there's no evidence of harm isn't the same as saying they've been proved safe.
A joint commission of the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has established a protocol for evaluating the safety of GMOs, which it says have the potential to introduce toxins and new allergens (or increase levels of existing ones), or cause nutritional changes in foods and other unexpected effects. Other developed nations have used those guidelines in creating mandatory premarket safety assessments systems for genetically modified organisms. But the Food and Drug Administration doesn't require any safety assessment of genetically engineered crops, though it invites companies to provide data for a voluntary safety review.
Animal studies — commonly used to help assess human health risks — have suggested that GMOs might cause damage to the immune system, liver and kidneys. More studies are needed to determine long-term effects. And the ability of researchers to track potential health effects of GMOs in the human population is hampered by the absence of labeling.
Why the labeling debate?
GMO labeling is mandatory in more than 60 countries but not in the U.S. Opponents to mandatory labeling here often say that it unfairly implies that foods with genetically engineered ingredients are unsafe. Those in favor of mandatory labels — including Consumers Union, the advocacy arm of Consumer Reports — argue that even if the jury is still out on the health impact of GMOs, shoppers have a right to know what's in their food. “Producers already must label foods that are frozen, from concentrate, homogenized or irradiated,” says Jean Halloran, director of food policy initiatives at Consumers Union. “GMO labeling is one more piece of helpful information.”
It's not surprising that much of the opposition to GMO labeling comes from GMO seed manufacturers and the food industry, who have spent a lot of money to get their position out to the public. Among those contributing the most to oppose a labeling measure in Colorado were Coca-Cola, DuPont, Kraft Foods, Monsanto (which produces seeds for GMO crops) and PepsiCo.
Which foods contain GMOs?
The vast majority of corn, soy, canola and sugar beets grown in the U.S. are now genetically engineered, and they are often used as ingredients in processed foods.
The food industry is also pushing to further expand the use of genetic engineering. A new form of salmon that is genetically altered to grow to maturity twice as fast as wild salmon is currently undergoing a safety review by the FDA. If approved, it would be the first genetically engineered food animal to be marketed.
The Department of Agriculture recently approved a potato that is genetically engineered to resist bruising and to have potentially lower levels of acrylamide, a suspected human carcinogen that the vegetable can produce when it is cooked at the high temperatures used to make potato chips and french fries. The FDA hasn't completed a voluntary safety review for the new GMO potato yet, but McDonald's has stated that it is sticking to its current policy of using only non-GMO potatoes for its fries.