"That said, compelling evidence was ignored in the opinion piece defending GMOs. First, potential human health risks associated with genetically engineered (GE) foods were never assessed. Government bureaucrats, under documented corporate pressures, simply ruled that crops modified by genetic engineering were "substantially equivalent" to crops selected through conventional plant breeding programs. This allowed GE food products to be classified "generally accepted as safe," which exempted GE foods from extensive tests to ensure that new foods are safe for consumption.
Independent testsraise major concerns
The genetic engineering process is not as precise as its defenders suggest. Genetic engineering differs from traditional plant breeding in many important ways. There are many unanswered questions regarding the effects of GE on the modified organism – as well as those who consume GE foods. The few truly independent tests conducted on GE foods have raised significant public health concerns that have never been adequately addressed...
Promoters of GMOs suggest that any potential risks associated with GMOs are outweighed by the benefits of GE crops to protect the environment and provide food for a growing global population. Corporations that promote GMOs are not nonprofit or philanthropic organizations; their legal responsibility is to serve investors and enhance short-term economic value of their investments. If we could be assured that the environment and the hungry were well cared for in the process, perhaps the motives wouldn't matter. But, that is not the case.
Pesticide use in the United Stateshas not decreased, but increased while GE crops have gained dominance on U.S. farms. This is clearly documented by government statistics. Yields have not been higher for GE crops than for non-GE crops. The primary advantage of GE crops is simplification of pest management, allowing and eventually forcing farmers to farm more acres, resulting in larger and fewer farms. Perhaps the greatest concern is that corporate patenting of GE crops is bringing the American food system -- including agricultural research -- under corporate influence. The logical economic motive for promoting GMOs globally is not to provide food for hungry people but to extend corporate control and profit.
Those outside the U.S.recognize problems
Most of the rest of the world have not accepted GMOs as being without significant risks. Many people in "less developed" countries are rejecting GMOs because they see GE as the next wave of the Green Revolution, which in retrospect they see as a failure. They understand that while industrial agriculture can increase total production, it will provide food for those with money, not those who are hungry because they are poor. They also have seen that industrial agriculture is not sustainable, polluting their environment, degrading their land, and destroying their rural communities, cultures and economies.
See the entire article @ The Des Moines Register