US General Accounting Office says GMOs safe
CategoriesThe Life Sciences Network, a pro-GM, industry sponsored group, reports that the US General Accounting Office "has concluded that the health risks associated with genetically modified foods are equivalent to those posed by organic crops". This singular pronouncement, in stark contrast with the challenge to be issued by an Independent Science Panel on 15 June, comes at a time when the acceptance of genetically modified crops is at an all-time low around the world.
What's strange is not only that a government accounting body makes a scientific pronouncement about food safety, but also the kind of arguments used by the GM food proponents. Statements such as "[o]rganic crops may also be exposed to as much or more pesticides" show that someone either didn't do their homework or that huge commercial interests must be protected at all costs.
The US General Accounting Office has concluded that the health risks associated with genetically modified foods are equivalent to those posed by organic crops.
This comes as bad news for the organic food lobby, whose very legitimacy hinges on the necessary failure of GM technology.
Take tomatine, for example, an endogenous toxin found in both organic and GM tomato plants, but one which is only strictly regulated thanks to extensive testing procedures in the latter.
Consumers who prefer organic tomatoes may be putting themselves in greater danger by exposing themselves to unknown tomatine levels in their diet, and should thus rationally forgo their local organic grocer in search of a GM-friendly tomato stand.
Organic vegetables also pose a higher risk of carrying deadly E. coli 0157 bacteria.Since GM crops do not depend as heavily on natural fertilisers, they are less likely to harbour E. coli 0157 and are, arguably, safer to consume. Organic crops may also be exposed to as much or more pesticides.
GM crops, however, have been engineered to resist pests by producing natural toxins harmful only to targeted insects.Others have been designed to grow in harsher environments, where the usual suspects of pests cannot thrive. Such techniques have discounted the use of pesticides and diminished the impact of industrial-scale farming on the surrounding environment.
Yet, despite this evidence, GM food remains an object of scepticism, while organic crops continue to be touted as the healthier choice by leftist Luddites and Greenpeace activists. What likely matters most to the organic propaganda machine is not heightening consumer safety or maintaining environmental integrity, but increasing a profit margin.
What we need now, more than ever, is clear, balanced public debate on GM food before it is too late.
The author, Jason Lott, is a Marshall Scholar at Oxford University, England
Source: Agbioview, 4 June 2003
Comment:
Agbioview is a pro-GM discussion group set up by www.agbioworld.com
I am providing this article not for any intrinsic value of the arguments therein but to show how in this heated debate, truth seems to have lost all value.
posted by Sepp Hasslberger on Friday June 6 2003
updated on Saturday September 24 2005URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2003/06/06/us_general_accounting_office_says_gmos_safe.htm
