GMO vs non-GMO

February 27, 2018 Dan Purser MD

Some people become upset if they believe to be consuming GMO products. But what does GMO actually mean?

GMO stands for “genetically modified organism” which can also be said legally as a “living modified organism” or LMO. Usually this is not a problem, however, when it comes to digestion it can be a big issue for a lot of people. This can cause gut and digestion problems among other issues.

10 Reasons to Avoid GMO vs non-gmo

1. GMOs are unhealthy.

The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) urges doctors to prescribe non-GMO diets for all patients. They cite animal studies showing organ damage, gastrointestinal and immune system disorders, accelerated aging, and infertility. Human studies show how genetically modified (GM) food can leave material behind inside us, possibly causing long-term problems. Genes inserted into GM soy, for example, can transfer into the DNA of bacteria living inside us. The toxic insecticide produced by GM corn was found in the blood of pregnant women and their unborn fetuses.

Numerous health problems increased after GMOs were introduced in 1996. The percentage of Americans with three or more chronic illnesses jumped from 7% to 13%. In just nine years food allergies skyrocketed along with disorders such as autism, reproductive disorders, and digestive problems. Although there is not sufficient research to confirm that GMOs are a contributing factor, doctors groups such as the AAEM tell us not to wait before we start protecting ourselves, and especially our children who are most at risk.

The American Public Health Association and American Nurses Association are among many medical groups that condemn the use of GM bovine growth hormone because the milk from treated cows has more of the hormone IGF-1 (insulin-like growth factor 1) linked to cancer.

2. GMOs contaminate forever.

GMOs cross pollinate, and their seeds can travel. It is impossible to fully clean up our contaminated gene pool. Self-propagating GMO pollution will outlast the effects of global warming and nuclear waste. The potential impact is huge, threatening the health of future generations. GMO contamination has also caused economic losses for organic and non-GMO farmers who often struggle to keep their crops pure.

3. GMOs increase herbicide use.

Most GM crops are engineered as ‘herbicide tolerant’. Monsanto, for example, sells Roundup Ready crops, designed to survive applications of their Roundup herbicide.

Between 1996 and 2008, US farmers sprayed an extra 383 million pounds of herbicide on GMOs. Overuse of Roundup results in ‘superweeds’ resistant to the herbicide. This forces farmers to use more toxic herbicides every year. Not only does this create environmental harm, but GM foods also contain higher residues of toxic herbicides. Roundup, for example, is linked with sterility, hormone disruption, birth defects, and cancer.

4. Genetic engineering creates dangerous side effects.

By mixing genes from unrelated species, genetic engineering unleashes a host of unpredictable side effects. Moreover, irrespective of the type of genes that are inserted, the very process of creating a GM plant can result in massive collateral damage that produces new toxins, allergens, carcinogens, and nutritional deficiencies.

5. Government oversight is dangerously lax.

Most of the health and environmental risks of GMOs are ignored by superficial regulations and safety assessments. The reason for this tragedy is largely political. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for example, does not require a single safety study, does not mandate labeling of GMOs, and allows companies to put their GM foods onto the market without notifying the agency. Its justification was the claim lacked information showing that GM foods were substantially different. Secret agency memos, made public by a lawsuit, show an overwhelming consensus ,even among the FDA's scientists, GMOs can create unpredictable, hard-to-detect side effects. They urged long-term safety studies.

6. The biotech industry uses ‘tobacco science’ to claim product safety.

Biotech companies, like Monsanto, affirmed Agent Orange, PCBs, and DDT were safe. The same type of superficial, rigged research is used to try and convince us GMOs are safe. Independent scientists, however, have demonstrated without a doubt how industry-funded research is designed to avoid finding problems and adverse findings.

7. Independent research and reporting are attacked and suppressed.

Scientists who discover problems with GMOs are gagged, fired, threatened, and denied funding. The journal Nature acknowledged a "large block of scientists . . . denigrate research by other legitimate scientists in a knee-jerk, partisan, emotional way that is not helpful in advancing knowledge." Attempts by media to expose problems are also often censored.

8. GMOs harm the environment.

GM crops and their associated herbicides can harm birds, insects, amphibians, marine ecosystems, and soil organisms. They reduce bio-diversity, pollute water resources, and are unsustainable. For example, GM crops are eliminating habitat for monarch butterflies, whose populations are down 50% in the US. Roundup herbicide at very low doses causes birth defects in amphibians, embryonic deaths, endocrine disruptions, and organ damage in animals. GM canola grows wild in North Dakota and California, threatening to pass on its herbicide tolerant genes to nearby weeds.

9. GMOs do not increase yields, and work against feeding a hungry world.

Whereas sustainable non-GMO agricultural methods used in developing countries have conclusively resulted in yield increases of 79% and higher. GMOs do not reflect these same yields on on average. This was evident in the Union of Concerned Scientists' 2009 report Failure to Yield―the definitive study to date on GM crops and yield.

The International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science, and Technology for Development (IAASTD) report, authored by more than 400 scientists and backed by 58 governments, stated GM crop yields were "highly variable" and in some cases, "yields declined." The report noted, "Assessment of the technology lags behind its development; information is anecdotal and contradictory, and uncertainty about possible benefits and damage is unavoidable." It determined current GMOs do not contribute to the goals of reducing hunger, poverty, malnutrition, and disease. On the contrary, GMOs divert money and resources that could be spent on safer, reliable, and appropriate technologies.

10. Reduce demand for GMOs and increasing overall consumer rejection

GMOs offer no consumer benefits and should be a marketing liability. Even if a small percentage of consumers start rejecting brands containing GMOs, food companies will kick them out. In Europe a high profile GMO safety scandal hit the papers and alerted citizens to the potential dangers in 1999 creating a ‘tipping point’. In the US, a consumer rebellion against GM bovine growth hormone reached a tipping point and kicked the cow drug out of dairy products by Wal-Mart, Starbucks, Dannon, Yoplait, and most of America's dairies.

These are the indirect reasons we do not use GMO products in any of our cosmetic products we manufacture as they are valid. I hope you understand more about GMOs and why it is so bad for our health and society.