Deconstructing Chinese-style Fallacies and Rumors about GMOs
In recent days,言论 about the harmfulness of GMOs have been common and widespread, some even escalating to the level of nationalism and national security, possessing great deceit, incitement, and harm. A large number of citizens have been misled, and the truth is lost in this collective unconscious frenzy. So what is the truth about GMOs? Let's first clarify a few popular misconceptions about GMOs.
Misconception One: Americans don't eat their own GMO agricultural products; they specifically export them to harm the third world
Let's look at the data from several authoritative US institutions:
The "Ten-Year Summary Report on US GMO Crops" published by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) in 2005 pointed out that as of early April 2005, the US federal government had approved more than 10,700 applications for GMO planting and cultivation, including 4,968 for corn; 843 for soybeans; 747 for potatoes; 724 for cotton; 552 for tomatoes; 358 for wheat; and 2,560 for others (barley, rice, pumpkin, papaya, etc.).
The latest data released by the USDA on June 30, 2011, showed that by planted area, 88% of the corn, 90% of the cotton, and 94% of the soybeans grown in the US are GMO varieties.
The Food Balance Sheet of the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization (2007) pointed out: In that year, the US produced 72.86 million tons of soybeans, 41% of which were for export, and the rest for domestic consumption, of which 93.1% were for food and less than 7% for feed. The annual corn production exceeded 330 million tons, 17.5% was for export, and of the portion consumed domestically, 28.7% was for food consumption. The largest proportion was sugar beets, which are used for sugar production, and almost 100% is for domestic consumption in the US.
In the face of irrefutable facts, the rumors are untenable. Although Americans consume a large amount of GMO products, they do not pay attention to whether the food is GMO. According to the food labeling guidelines issued by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), whether a food is labeled "GMO" is left to the discretion of the food company. If a food label states "non-GMO food or不含转基因成分," it implies that this food is superior to others, leading to consumer confusion. Such misleading food labeling is not permitted by regulations.
Misconception Two: The US is a major GMO agricultural country and allows the consumption of GMO agricultural products for national interests, but in Europe and Japan, the consumption of GMO foods is absolutely prohibited
The reality is: countries like Spain, Czech Republic, Portugal, and Poland all plant GMO corn. The EU's list of authorized GMOs includes 23 types of GMO corn, 3 types of rapeseed, 1 type of potato, 3 types of soybeans, and 1 type of sugar beet. With the exception of a very few used for feed or industrial purposes, the vast majority are for food.
Japan is the world's largest corn importer and the third-largest soybean importer. In 2010, Japan imported 14.343 million tons of US corn and 2.347 million tons of US soybeans, most of which were GMO varieties. As early as April 1, 2001, the Japanese Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries officially promulgated and implemented the "GMO Food Labeling Law," with detailed instructions on how to label GMO foods. For example, tofu made from GMO soybeans must be labeled as GMO, but soy sauce and salad oil made from GMO crops do not require labeling.
Therefore, the claim that the EU and Japan prohibit the consumption of GMO foods is purely a rumor.
Misconception Three: GMOs are harmful to health
The reality: Are GMOs safe? Let's see what several authoritative organizations have to say.
The WHO Food Safety Department clearly stated in its report "Modern Food Biotechnology, Human Health and Development—Evidence-Based Research" published on June 1, 2005: "All GMO foods currently on the international market have undergone risk assessment and are not riskier than their traditional counterparts."
The UN Food and Agriculture Organization also stated clearly in the "UN Statement on the Use of GMO Foods as Food Aid in Southern Africa": "It is unlikely that there is a risk to human health from consuming the GMO-containing foods provided as food aid in Southern Africa. These organizations confirm that to date, no scientific literature has been found showing adverse effects on human health from consuming these foods."
The European Commission's report also pointed out: GMO crops have not shown any new risks to human health or the environment; due to the use of more precise technologies and stricter regulation, they may even be safer than conventional crops and foods.
In addition, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare have both explicitly stated to consumers that GMO foods on the market are safe.
In the field of scientific research, there are only a few serious papers questioning the safety of GMOs, but the results of these studies have been rejected by the scientific community due to improper experimental design and lack of repeatability.
To date, no scientific study has confirmed that GMOs are harmful to health.
Misconception Four: GMOs pose unpredictable risks to the human body, and this danger might only become apparent in decades! Who can guarantee that nothing will go wrong in the future? If absolute safety cannot be guaranteed, then people are being used as guinea pigs
Science is infinitely open to the future; it is an impossible task to prove that a certain food will definitely have no side effects in the future. It's not just GMOs that cannot be proven harmless; many new technologies and new foods also cannot be proven harmless. Should the pace of human scientific progress then come to a halt?
Authoritative organizations such as the World Health Organization and the FDA state that GMOs are safe for consumption and there is no need to wait for generations to confirm their safety. The reason is that, in principle, GMO technology is an extension of traditional breeding methods, and in terms of health and environmental protection, GMOs do not pose higher risks than traditional crops.
GMO breeding methods are even safer and more reliable than traditional ones. When two parent lines are crossed using traditional breeding methods, we are largely ignorant of their genes and cannot predict the possible consequences; in GMO, however, we are introducing a specific gene that we have thoroughly understood, thus having greater confidence in the safety of the food.
Moreover, GMO foods are the most thoroughly evaluated and strictly regulated foods in history. The first GMO food, "Flavr Savr tomato," has been on the market for 17 years, and the number of people consuming GMO foods is in the billions. There has not been a single case of harm to health. Furthermore, due to transcending the usual uncertainties of traditional plant breeding, using more precise technologies and greater regulatory scrutiny, they may even be safer than traditional plants and foods.
Misconception Five: China is the first country to commercialize GMO staple foods, and we are once again the guinea pigs
The reality is: As early as 1999, the US approved GMO rice. Iran, Canada, and Mexico have also approved it subsequently. Corn is one of the three major staple foods for Americans, and now 88% of the corn fields in the US are planted with GMO corn, and what most Americans eat is also GMO corn.
Many people believe that the main staple food in the US is wheat, so why hasn't wheat been genetically modified? This is because the existing GMO technology mainly introduces genes that are resistant to herbicides and pests. For wheat, however, weeds and pests are not major problems; the main factors affecting wheat yield are diseases, drought, and cold. The existing GMO wheat has no commercial advantage and has not entered large-scale commercial planting.
Social Psychological Analysis of GMO Rumors
The difficulty in quelling GMO rumors stems from the loss of social "authority." Due to the chaos in food regulation, regulatory bodies have lost public trust, causing the public to panic at the mention of food additives and fear new foods, relying only on tradition and abandoning science, which provides fertile ground for the "GMOs are harmful" rumor. This can only be called a Chinese-style scientific tragedy.