[extoc]

Potential Dangers

People still argue that it could be dangerous to have the gene added to the tomato, and it’s indeed possible that somehow the production of the natural, non toxic, antifreeze now being produced by the variety of tomato could somehow interact with the rest of the tomato, but it is unlikely and given that the fish it was from is safe to consume, most likely so is the tomato. In either case that project was scrapped because it didn’t produce the quality results that the company wanted; most likely they couldn’t get the gene to actually activate properly.

That’s not to say that artificial engineering isn’t potentially dangerous. Although, it’s most likely to be dangerous to the environment rather than to humans. One of the threats generated by artificial engineering is horizontal gene transfer. Horizontal gene transfer is the transfer of genes between organisms by means other than traditional reproduction. This occurs in nature and I will get to that later. However, the danger present in artificial engineering is that we are sometimes introducing novel genes into the environment and we are introducing large quantities of the gene into the environment. In the first case, the danger is clear: novel genes could have potentially negative impacts on the environment. The second threat comes from the fact that the greater the presence the gene has in the environment, the more likely horizontal gene transfer, and thus gene escape, is to occur.

Genetic Pollution

Even without horizontal gene transfer, genetic pollution is probably one of the biggest concerns overall. Creating a genetically modified organism in a lab is one thing, but many GMOs are designed to be released into the environment. There are some protections against modified genes escaping, such as sterility, but there are cases where genes do escape and GMOs often will cross breed with outside populations. One counter argument is that potentially dangerous genes arise through evolution. This is true, but the difference is that many of those genes die out before they get too far. If these genes are placed into crops or into animals, the intent is often that they are to be used in a large geographic area. We thus spread and perpetuate the genes. This can be seen as a form of genetic pollution.

Of course, this same threat exists with domestication and any manipulation of the evolutionary process has potential consequences. We are taking a risk every time we do anything to manipulate the environment, so one could argue that we should minimize how we impact the environment altogether, possibly by isolating our actions from the environment. Perhaps if that were feasible, I would agree, but unfortunately we lack the technology necessary for this at the moment.

Unintented Changes

A final danger is a rather complicated one. Genes can impact multiple different traits. Therefore, while it may seem like we are only manipulating one trait, we could be manipulating a whole slew of traits and not realize it. We see this with selective breeding as well. For instance, an experiment on selective breeding of fox to obtain a more docile breed, much the same way as wolves have been bred into dogs, it became apparent that along with the docile trait being amplified, juvinile traits also became amplified.

In order to mitigate such a risk, we would first have to have a very good understanding of the organism’s genome, what genes are on which chromosomes, which genes code for multiple proteins and when they are activated in each case. Obtaining such information would incredibly time consuming. While the human genome is mapped, we still do not know what each gene does in most cases. Having the ability to simulate protein folding would help.

Corporate Misuse

Now we get to the real issue at hand, an issue that puts me in opposition with corporations such as Monsanto; while genetic manipulation has produced life saving results and could lead to major advances in technology and the quality of life for humanity, we are not yet prepared to utilize GMO on an industrial scale. Beyond that corrupt corporations like Monsanto, with the help of big government, are utilizing patent laws to choke out competition of farming.

Because corporations can patent genes and because those genes can find their way into other crops, just through natural sexual reproduction, companies like Monsanto can attack any small farmer that ends up with the patented genes in his or her field. This is not a problem with GMO technology but a problem with how our laws protect factory farms and massive corporations like Monsanto and allow them to abuse small businesses. This is one of the many dangers associated with intellectual property laws and how those laws protect mega corporations while harming the little guy. To be fair to Monsanto specifically, they have not gone after people who have had patented genes inadvertently show up within their stock.

The other issue has to do with marketing; GMO products in many cases do not have to be labeled as such. Intentional sales of GMO products without proper labeling should not be allowed. Then at least people can decide for themselves whether or not to consume such products. Note that I am not suggesting that businesses be forced to label their products as GMO or not. I am suggesting that they should try to do so. Forced labeling would actually hurt many small farmers because they simply cannot afford it.

Myths

DNA contamination

There are quite a few myths surrounding GMO foods. One of the more interesting ones is the idea that genes from GMO food can “infect” human DNA. This is simply not the case. While some genes from our food may end up in our gut bacteria, this is true for both GMO and non-GMO foods. The body has in place multiple safeguards against transgenic material (DNA from other organisms). Also remember that unless the gene is new or not a gene from something we already eat, it is already in our diet.

Proper use of GMO

Proper use of genetic engineering is actually next to impossible given our current level of technology. We really should have computers capable of folding virtual proteins in order to see exactly what shape (and therefore function) the proteins would have.

There are a few cases where it may be a little absurd to wait. For instance, people spent a large amount of time looking for coffee trees with the caffeine producing gene knocked out. This would occur due to some random mutation. However, it would be quite easy to manually knock the caffeine producing gene out of the Coffea Arabica genome. Given that we’ve seen this gene knocked out before, we know the effects pretty well. There’s no reason not to do it manually.

In cases of novel gene production, the genes should be confined as much as possible. Hydroponic and aquaponic systems are the perfect residence for GMOs. We really should be working on such systems anyway, since they offer a large amount of potential in regard to food production and pollution management, both here and, possibly one day, beyond our tiny blue marble.

Finally, as mentioned in the section on artificial engineering, genetic engineering is crucial for diabetes patients. While there are some natural sources of insulin, a large component of the life saving drug comes from genetically modified yeasts.

Genetic Engineering and GMOs