regulation Archives - Best Food Facts

GMOs and Human Health

Best Food Facts — Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:22:24 +0000

GMOs – we’ve read about them in the news, have researched their ancient roots and continue to have discussions with our family and friends about them. GMOs, genetically modified organisms, or even ‘frankenfood,’ as they have been called have been eaten by consumers for many years.

What are the health risks of eating GMO foods? Are GMO foods less nutritious? Do they cause allergies? What foods are GMOs? To address our reader’s concerns, we put these questions before a panel of experts:

Peggy Lemaux, Cooperative Extension Specialist at the University of California – Berkeley
Wayne Parrott, Professor in the Department of Crop and Soil Sciences College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences University of Georgia, University of Georgia
Bruce Chassy, Professor of Food Microbiology and Nutritional Sciences; Executive Associate Director of the Biotechnology Center; Assistant Dean for Science Communications in the College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois – Urbana/Champaign
Martina Newell-McGloughlin, Director, University of California Systemwide Biotechnology Research and Education Program (UCBREP), Co-Director, National Institutes of Health Training Program in Biomolecular Technology, Co-Director, NSF IGERT CREATE Training Program, and Adjunct Associate Professor, Department of Plant Pathology at the University of California-Davis.

Are GMO fruits and vegetables less nutritious than non-GMO or organic fruits and vegetables?

Dr. Lemaux: “That’s a good question! Foods that have been genetically modified undergo testing for safety, health and nutrient value. The nutritional value of GMO foods is tested and compared against non-GMO foods. Numerous studies have shown no nutritional differences between commercially available GMO and non-GMO foods. In fact, genetic modification can improve the nutritional content of some foods, for example, low linoleic acid canola oil that can reduce trans-fat content. In these cases, the foods must be labeled to show the nutritional differences according to FDA policy.”

Dr. Parrott: “Before any GMO can come to market, it must undergo extensive testing to ensure that the content of vitamins, minerals and other nutrients is not inadvertently altered during the final process. For every study that finds nutritional superiority in organic produce, another finds it in GMO produce. The bottom line is to make sure you eat as many fresh fruits and vegetables as you can, regardless of whether they are organic or GMO.”

Dr. Chassy: “Recent reviews have concluded that there is no difference in nutrient quality between organic and non-organic produce. Some disagree because they believe (not based on science, but rather, personal beliefs) that organic matter derived from living organisms provides a vital life force to crops that cannot be supplied by inorganic chemical fertilizers. This is just not the case when we look at this based on research. This thinking has transitioned into a belief by some that organic is more nutritious, which has simply not been proven.”

Do GMOs cause allergies?

Dr. Lemaux: “GM foods that are in the grocery stores (commercially available) are not likely to cause allergic reactions any more so than non-GM foods. Food allergies are nothing new, and under the FDA’s biotechnology food policy, GMO foods must be labeled as such if the genetic information comes from one of the eight most common allergy-causing foods, unless the new food is shown to be allergy-free. Those foods are dairy, eggs, fish, shellfish, tree nuts, wheat, soybeans, and peanuts. All GMO foods undergo food safety testing that focuses on the source of the gene or protein product that has been introduced into the food. Even so, no food product can be deemed 100% safe, whether it be conventional (non-GMO), GMO or organic. For example, peanuts can cause severe allergies regardless of how they’re grown – so they would be considered unsafe for some people.”

Dr. Chassy: “Food allergies dramatically change the lives of people who have them. Fortunately, only a very small percentage of people are allergic to any one food. This is because food allergy is almost always caused by specific proteins present in the offending food, but the great majority of proteins (>99.9999+%) that we consume do not cause allergies. It is important to stress that there is no a prior reason to believe that GM foods might cause allergies, and to date, none has.”

Dr. Newell-McGloughlin: “No. In fact, the work that is being done in GMO research can, in fact, reduce allergies. There are very specific sets of indicators that determine whether a specific protein in GMOs would cause an allergic response. Those proteins that are difficult to digest cause an allergic response, causing the body to create antibodies to them. This can happen with a number of proteins, but there is nothing inherent about biotech products that would cause allergies.”

Are there health risks associated with consuming GMOs?

Dr. Newell-McGloughlin: “No. GMOs are more thoroughly tested than any product produced in the history of agriculture. We use many methods to introduce desired traits – to try to get specific characteristics into our crops. With GMOs, they are thoroughly tested before any product is released into the marketplace. In all the risk assessments in over 15 years of field research and 30 years of laboratory research, there hasn’t been a single instance where there was a health risk associated with a GMO product.”

Science Magazine: U.S expert panel says genetically modified crops are safe to eat

Some believe that the FDA’s research on GMOs’ impacts on health is flawed. What are your thoughts on that?

Dr. Newell-McGloughlin: “In the U.S., GMOs are more highly regulated than any other methods to introduce traits into crops today, by three different agencies:

Food and Drug Administration
United States Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
Environmental Protection Agency

The primary body that regulates the commercialization of GMOs is USDA-APHIS. This is a lengthy process which, for most regulation, takes several years to determine whether approval will be granted. No other product or system that is used to introduce desired traits undergoes the same level of scrutiny as do the products of modern biotechnology.”

Dr. Parrott: “Although there is no indication that the FDA has made a wrong call on any GM product, the point remains that we are in a global economy. Thus, it is not just FDA who approves these foods, but also FoodCanada, the European Food Safety Authority, the Food Standards for Australia and New Zealand, and various agencies in Japan and Korea, among others. It is one thing to say that FDA’s procedures might be flawed; it is another to say every major food safety agency is flawed. Thus far, I am not aware of any situation whereby one agency gave a GM product a clean bill of health and another failed to do so.”

Dr. Chassy: “There was never any scientific reason to believe that foods produced using biotechnology present any new, different or special hazards. From a scientific perspective, they pose even fewer hazards than the conventionally bred crops that we have been eating safely for millennia. The pre-market regulatory review is intended to ensure the consumer that GM foods have been checked for safety before they go to market. In the heat of the argument, we often lose sight of the fact that every expert analysis of the safety of GM crops has concluded that they are as safe as any other crop.”

In summary, GMO foods are just as safe to consume as conventional, organic, or non-GMO foods.

For additional resources:

GMO Answers

Genetic Literacy Project

Originally published Aug. 8, 2011

The post GMOs and Human Health appeared first on Best Food Facts.

“Elimination of farm subsidies will reduce obesity and associated health problems.”

Best Food Facts — Sat, 02 Nov 2013 18:29:33 +0000

Many advocates argue that U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) policies that establish farm prices for crops, provide subsidies to farmers and provide consumers with access to an abundant and affordable food supply are responsible for the increasing number of adults and children facing the challenges of obesity and diabetes. However, Julian M. Alston, with the University of California-Davis Department of Agriculture and Resource Economics, says his research shows that eliminating farm subsidies would do little to change obesity rates, noting that consumers do not necessarily change food purchases patterns based on cost and that advances in technology and efficiencies on the farm have more to do with the low cost of today’s food than USDA policies and programs.

True or Not? “Elimination of farm subsidies will reduce obesity and associated health problems.”

Julian Alston, PhD says:

Research shows that eliminating farm subsidies would do little to change obesity rates.

U.S. farm policies have had a negligible effect on the consumer price of food and food consumption. While many arguments can be made for changing farm subsidies, entirely eliminating the current programs would not have any significant influence on obesity trends.

Obesity has increased rapidly in the United States and in many other countries. The proximal cause of obesity is simple and not disputed: people consume more food energy than they use. Farm subsidies could have contributed to lower relative prices and increased consumption of fattening foods by making certain farm commodities more abundant and therefore cheaper. However, each of several component elements must be true for farm subsidies to have had a significant effect on obesity rates.

First, farm subsidies must have made farm commodities significantly more abundant and cheaper.

Second, the lower commodity prices caused by farm subsidies must have resulted in significantly lower costs to the food industry

Third, the cost savings to the food marketing firms must have been passed on to consumers in the form of lower prices of food.

Fourth, food consumption patterns must have changed significantly in response to these policy-induced changes in prices.

In fact, the magnitude of the impact in each of these steps is zero or small, so the overall effect is negligible. Let us consider each step briefly.

First, farm subsidies have had very modest (and mixed) effects on the total availability and prices of farm commodities that are the most important ingredients in more-fattening foods. U.S. farm subsidy policies include both Farm Bill programs and trade barriers that raise U.S. farm prices and incomes for favored commodities. These policies support farm incomes either through transfers from taxpayers, or at the expense of consumers, or both. Thus, they might make agricultural commodities cheaper or more expensive and might therefore increase or reduce the cost of certain types of food. Indeed, for several important food products (dairy, sugar, and orange juice) that have been associated with obesity, barriers to imports are used to raise the prices paid by consumers in order to support the prices received by producers. In fact, balancing the effects of these types of policies with policies that make other food commodities cheaper (such as corn, wheat, and soybeans), the effect of farm price support policies has been to make food commodities overall a little more expensive for buyers.

Second, such small commodity price impacts would imply very small effects on costs of food at retail, which, even if fully passed on to consumers, would mean even smaller percentage changes in prices faced by consumers. The cost of farm commodities as ingredients represents only a small share of the cost of retail food products; on average about 20 percent, and much less for products such as soda and for meals away from home, which are often implicated in the rise in obesity. Hence, a very large percentage change in commodity prices would be required to have an appreciable percentage effect on food prices.

Third, given that food consumption is relatively unresponsive to changes in market prices, the very small food price changes induced by U.S. farm subsidies could not have had large effects on food consumption patterns. Simple causation from farm subsidies to obesity is also inconsistent with international patterns across countries. For example, obesity trends for adult males and children in Australia are similar to those in the United States, but Australia phased out its farm commodity programs, over the 1980s and 1990s.

Corn is often the target of criticism as a contributor to obesity, especially because of its use to make high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) which is used as a caloric sweetener in many foods and beverages. The use of HFCS as a sweetener has been encouraged by U.S. sugar policy that made sugar much more expensive and gave food manufacturers economic incentive to substitute HFCS for sugar. Corn itself does receive subsidies that encourage production and have made it cheaper and more abundant for consumers in the past. But even for corn the subsidies have not had a very large effect—increases in availability and reductions in buyer prices for the farm commodity of well less than 10 percent in the years of greatest subsidy, and much less than that in recent years given the high world market prices and the demand for corn as feedstock for ethanol plants. Most corn is actually consumed in the form of meat or dairy products. Corn and other feedstuff represent less 8 percent of the retail cost of meat such that a 10 percent cut in the farm price of corn would imply at most a 0.8 percent reduction in the retail price of meat facing consumers. Similar calculations apply for other retail foods. Consequently, eliminating corn subsidies could not be expected to have large and favorable effects on consumer incentives to eat more-healthy diets such that obesity rates would be meaningfully reduced.

The sweetener market merits some explicit discussion. Farm subsidies are responsible for the growth in the use of corn to produce high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) as a caloric sweetener, but not in the way it is often suggested. The culprit here is not corn subsidies; rather, it is sugar policy that has restricted imports, driven up the U.S. price of sugar, and encouraged the replacement of sugar with alternative caloric sweeteners. Combining the sugar policy with the corn policy, the net effect of farm subsidies has been to increase the price of caloric sweeteners generally, and to discourage total consumption while causing a shift within the category between sugar and HFCS. In this context, eliminating the subsidy policies would result in cheaper caloric sweeteners and, if anything, more rather than less total consumption of sweeteners, with a switch in the mix back towards sugar.

Farm commodities have indeed become much more abundant and cheaper over the past 50 years in the world as a whole as well as in the United States, but not because of subsidies. This abundance mainly reflects the effects of technological innovations and increases in farm productivity that have rescued billions of the world’s poor from the shackles of poverty and starvation, while at the same time reducing pressure on the world’s natural resources. If cheaper and more abundant food has contributed to obesity, then we should look to agricultural innovation rather than farm subsidies as the fundamental cause. Even so, it would be a dreadful mistake to seek to oppose and slow agricultural innovation with a view to reducing obesity rates. Conversely, though it might be beneficial in other ways, eliminating U.S. farm subsidies would have negligible consequences for obesity rates. The challenge for policy makers is to find other—more effective and more economically rational—ways to reduce the social consequences of excess food consumption while at the same time enhancing consumption opportunities for the poor and protecting the world’s resources for future generations.

_{Further Reading}

_{Alston, J.M., D.A. Sumner, and S.A. Vosti. “Are Agricultural Policies Making Us Fat? Likely Links between Agricultural Policies and Human Nutrition and Obesity, and Their Policy Implications.” Review of Agricultural Economics 28(3)(Fall 2006): 313-322.}

_{Alston, J.M., D.A. Sumner, and S.A. Vosti, “Farm Subsidies and Obesity in the United States: National Evidence and International Comparisons.” Food Policy 33(6) (December 2008): 470-479.}

_{“20150624-FFAS-LSC-0087” by U.S. Department of Agriculture is licensed under CC BY 2.0.}

The post “Elimination of farm subsidies will reduce obesity and associated health problems.” appeared first on Best Food Facts.

Why are GMOs Banned in Other Countries?

Best Food Facts — Wed, 12 Dec 2012 14:36:46 +0000

As part of our video series on GMOs, we received two questions in regards to GMOs and their availability in other countries besides the United States. One YouTube viewer commented, “Fact is other countries label GMO’s, why is that? Why can’t the consumer decide for themselves? Why are they trying to pass this off as normal food, when it has been modified? What about soy that is made to grow with pesticides inside of it, that cannot be washed off?” Another YouTube viewer asked, “Why are GMOs banned in so many countries?”

To answer these questions, we reached out to Dr. Robert Paarlberg, Betty Freyhof Johnson Class of 1944 Professor of Political Science at Wellesley College and Adjunct Professor of Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School, and Associate at Harvard’s Weatherhead Center for International Affairs.

Dr. Robert Paarlberg

The European Union does not formally ban the consumption of GMO corn or soy. Some countries in the EU – such as Spain – grow modest amounts of GMO corn for animal feed, and the EU as a whole imports considerable GMO soy, again for use as animal feed. It is also legal in the EU to import various types of GMO cotton, maize, rapeseed, and sugar beet. What makes the EU different from the United States is not a ‘ban’ on consumption or imports, but instead 1) non-approval of domestic cultivation of many GMO products, plus 2) mandatory labeling of food products that have even small traces of GMO content. Food companies in Europe have reformulated their products taking out all GMO ingredients so as to avoid these labels, and this is what has squeezed GMO foods for direct human consumption out of the market. But products from animals raised on GMO feed do not need a label, so Europeans continue to use GMO corn and soy for animal feed.

Very few countries explicitly ‘ban’ GMOs. In most cases, governments have simply not yet ‘approved’ various GMO crops for cultivation, or for import, or for human consumption. The presumption that each separate GMO should require case-by-case and use-by-use approval, by national government regulatory committees, has greatly slowed down the uptake of the technology. In effect, GMO foods and crops are being regulated as strictly as medical drugs, even though there is no evidence that they carry more risks than conventional foods and crops (in the official opinion of the EU Research Directorate, for example). Critics of GMO crops have promoted highly precautionary regulatory systems as one way to slow down the spread of the technology, and in large parts of the developing world governments have not yet given any cultivation approvals at all.

Few countries explicitly ‘ban’ GMOs. Governments have simply not yet ‘approved’ various GMO crops.
Click To Tweet

Do you have a question to ask the experts? Please submit a question!

View our five-part video series focused on genetically modified food:

GMO 101

Are GMOs Safe?

Are GMOs Harmful to the Environment?

Are GM Foods Nutritionally Different?

GM Labeling

_{“25a.Autumn.WholeFoods.1440P.NW.WDC.14October2014” by Elvert Barnesmizo is licensed under CC BY-SA.}

The post Why are GMOs Banned in Other Countries? appeared first on Best Food Facts.

VIDEO: Is There a Nutritional Difference Between Genetically Modified and Non-Genetically Modified Foods?

Best Food Facts — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 19:04:56 +0000

We gathered questions from consumers about foods grown using genetically-modified organisms. From those questions, we developed a five-part video series to address the many angles of this topic, including general information, food safety, nutrition, labeling and environmental impacts.

Registered Dietitian and past president of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, Connie Diekman, links up with Farrah Brown, a part-time nurse and full-time mom, to talk about whether genetically-modified foods are more or less nutritious than other foods.

We’re interested in understanding what additional questions you have for Connie. Feel free to submit questions below in the comments or here.

What did other experts say about genetically modified foods, related to nutrition and safety?

Are GMO fruits and vegetables healthy? What about nutrition? Are GMO fruits and vegetables less nutritious than non-GMO or organic fruits and vegetables?

Dr. Peggy Lemaux, Cooperative Extension Specialist, Department of Plant and Microbial Biology, University of California-Berkley:

It’s a good question. Foods that have been genetically modified undergo testing for safety, health and nutrient value. The nutritional value of GMO foods is tested and compared against non-GMO foods. Numerous studies have shown no nutritional differences between commercially available GMO and non-GMO foods. In fact, genetic modification can actually improve the nutritional content of some foods, for example low linoleic acid canola oil that can reduce trans fat content. In these cases, the foods must be labeled to show the nutritional differences according to FDA policy.

Dr. Wayne Parrott, Professor, Plant Breeding and Genomics, University of Georgia:

It is important to note that only one GMO vegetable is currently commercially available – squash/zucchini. This vegetable, along with all other GMO foods, has undergone extensive testing to ensure the nutritional content. Before any GMO can come to market, it must undergo extensive testing to ensure that the content of vitamins, minerals and other nutrients is not inadvertently altered during the final process. For every study that finds nutritional superiority in organic produce, another finds it in GMO produce. The bottom line is to make sure you eat as many fresh fruits and vegetables as you can, regardless of whether they are organic or GMO.

Dr. Lemaux:

I’d like to add that, in general, there are not a large number of peer-reviewed studies analyzing nutritional differences between GMO and non-GMO foods. Strictly from a nutritional perspective, there is not enough data at present to show nutritional benefits from GMO or non-GMO, conventionally or organically grown foods that favors consuming them for health benefits. If the goal, however, is to promote healthy eating, it is more important for consumers to focus on eating a healthy, balanced diet, rich in fruits and vegetables. There is convincing evidence that diets rich in fresh fruits and vegetables, regardless of the methods used to produce them, improve health and are associated with reduced frequency and severity of a number of health conditions.

Do GMOs cause allergies?

Dr. Lemaux:

GM foods that are commercially-available (that is, in the grocery store), are not likely to cause allergic reactions any more so than non-GM foods. Food allergies are nothing new, and under the FDA’s biotechnology food policy, GMO foods must be labeled as such if the genetic information comes from one of the eight most common allergy-causing foods, unless the new food is shown to be allergy-free. Those foods are dairy, eggs, fish, shellfish, tree nuts, wheat, soybeans, and peanuts.

Dr. Bruce Chassy, Professor Emeritus, Biotechnology, University of Illinois:

Food allergies dramatically change the lives of people who have them. Fortunately, only a very small percentage of people are allergic to any one food. This is because food allergy is almost always caused by specific proteins present in the offending food, but the great majority of proteins (>99.9999+%) that we consume do not cause allergies. It is important to stress that there is no reason to believe that GM foods might cause allergies, and to date, none has.

Dr. Parrott:

The regulation goes on to say that labels are not required if they prove the gene in question is not what makes the food allergenic, which is most likely the case today, given that extensive allergy testing that takes place.

Dr. Lemaux:

All GMO foods undergo food safety testing that focuses on the source of the gene or protein product that has been introduced into the food. Even so, no food product can be deemed 100% safe, whether it be conventional (non-GMO), GMO or organic. For example, peanuts can cause severe allergies regardless of how they’re grown – so they would be considered unsafe for some people.

Dr. Martina Newell-McGloughlin, Director, University of California Systemwide Biotechnology Research and Education Program (UCBREP); Co-Director, National Institutes of Health Training Program in Biomolecular Technology; Co-Director, NSF IGERT CREATE Training Program; Adjunct Associate Professor, Department of Plant Pathology, University of California-Davis:

No. In fact, the work that is being done in GMO research can, in fact, reduce allergies. There are very specific sets of indicators that determine whether a specific protein in GMOs would cause an allergic response. Those proteins that are difficult to digest cause an allergic response, causing the body to create antibodies to them. This can happen with a number of proteins, but there is nothing inherent about biotech products that would cause allergies.

Are there health risks associated with consuming GMOs?

Dr. Newell-McGloughlin:

No. GMOs are more thoroughly tested than any product produced in the history of agriculture. We use many methods to introduce desired traits – to try to get specific characteristics into our crops. With GMOs, they are thoroughly tested before any product is released into the marketplace. In all the risk assessments in over 15 years of field research and 30 years of laboratory research, there hasn’t been a single instance where there was a health risk associated with a GMO product.

Some groups say the FDA’s research on GMOs’ impacts on health is flawed. What are your thoughts on that?

Dr. Newell-McGloughlin:

In the U.S., GMOs are more highly regulated than any other methods to introduce traits into crops today, by three different agencies:

Food and Drug Administration

United States Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)

Environmental Protection Agency

The primary body that regulates the commercialization of GMOs is USDA-APHIS. This is a lengthy process which, for most regulation, takes several years to determine whether approval will be granted. No other product or system that is used to introduce desired traits undergoes the same level of scrutiny as do the products of modern biotechnology.

Dr. Parrott:

Although there is no indication that the FDA has made a wrong call on any GM product, the point remains that we are in a global economy. Thus, it is not just FDA who approves these foods, but also FoodCanada, the European Food Safety Authority, the Food Standards for Australia and New Zealand, and various agencies in Japan and Korea, among others. It is one thing to say that FDA’s procedures might be flawed; it is another to say every major food safety agency is flawed. Thus far, I am not aware of any situation whereby one agency gave a GM product a clean bill of health and another failed to do so.

Dr. Chassy:

There was never any scientific reason to believe that foods produced using biotechnology present any new, different or special hazards. From a scientific perspective they pose even fewer hazards than the conventionally bred crops that we have been eating safely for millennia. The pre-market regulatory review is intended to insure the consumer that GM foods have been checked for safety before they go to market. In the heat of the argument, we often lose sight of the fact that every expert analysis of the safety of GM crops has concluded that they are as safe as any other crop.

Still have questions? Ask an expert here.

The post VIDEO: Is There a Nutritional Difference Between Genetically Modified and Non-Genetically Modified Foods? appeared first on Best Food Facts.