Everywhere I look, I keep seeing the label:" Non GMO". Why? Are gmos really harmful? If so, where is the research proving that harm? Are any and all GMOs harmful?
Answers (1)
Science is not a tool for discovering tautologies. It's a method of collecting theories, observations, statistically significant conclusions in a slightly more reliable format. The inclusion and weighing of any component are still up in the air, so controversy is abundant until the harm is definitive on a large scale. Especially because science is still biased, being conducted by human researchers, and corporations are most averse to giving up their profit.
Besides, ultimately laymen don't care about science. Just as you've made up your mind before taking 5 minutes to search and read the first article on a hot topic, so do others make up their minds based on intuition and rumor, not science. And for that sake is the label "non gmo". Because popular labels have long proven to boost sales regardless of necessity. You wanna tell people their lifestyle choices are meaningless, good luck with that.
And do you believe it was a good thing, optimising crop output and value over centuries, with little consideration for nature or sustainability?
If you're only looking out for yourself and other people in your immediate vicinity, it's probably true that significantly hazardous effects are unlikely in the lifetime scale, unless someone happens to mess up colossally and without scrutiny. But then anybody can get hit by a truck at any time without warning, existence is a roll of the dice. I just find such parochialism aggravating. And I wouldn't call modern society overclocking itself to damnation a consolation.
While appreciate your answers, they didn't answer my question. Is there science based evidence that GMOs are harmful? That's all I asked. That's all I want to know.
Thanks
Perhaps I wasn't sufficiently clear with the first paragraph. Scientific research cannot and does not prove catchall statements unequivocally. Evidence exists that might indicate potential harm. Or it might be interpreted otherwise.
For example, this article cites some papers published on the matter. I've neither the skill nor interest to interpret them, but from the story the author weaves, it seems to match the general criterion of "harm" directly linked to some subset of gmos. Does that answer your question?
https :// nutritionstudies . org / gmo-dangers-facts-you-need-to-know/
And here's a couple urls that should really fit your sensibilities:
https :// biology . stackexchange . com / questions/23863/will-genetically-modified-food-affect-our-health/23886#23886
https :// skeptics . stackexchange . com / search?q=GMO
Knock yourself out.
I haven't made up my mind. Being naturally skeptical, I have doubts about the subject. It may well be that GMOs cause harm, I just want to see the evidence. You are correct in saying that a lot of people only need belief, not evidence. And corporations rarely miss a chance to enhance profits. Actually, most everything we eat has been genetically modified, just not in the way it is popularly believed. Plant breeders produce successive generations waiting for a certain genetic modification to show up naturally. Modern science speeds up the process. It can also produce modifications that would never occur in nature, and these are what most consider troubling. The milk we drink, and the meat we eat are the result of hundreds of years of genetic manipulation by animal breeders. Now, what might have taken centuries before,can be produced in a single generation, and that is what scares people.