Think about what you have eaten the past several days. Chances are most of what you ate contained genetically modified organism that were not labeled on the packaging. Within the last ten years the use of genetically modified organism has been expanding rapidly. This science has thrown many consumers into uncertainty and is causing confusion about what exactly goes into the products on the shelf. Although genetically modified organisms provide large amounts of food, they are also causing harm to humans and the environment, as well as creating ethical problems. For these reasons, genetically modified foods should be labeled for consumers. Completely removing this new science is nearly impossible, but by labeling the product when it contains genetically modified organisms, people that are harmed or disagree with the new technology are able to avoid them. Everyone deserves to make informed and educated decisions, including what they put in their body.

Genetically modified organisms, commonly known as GMO's, are plants and animals scientifically modified to enhance desired traits and yield more product for consumption (Monsanto). "Today, we can incorporate new genes from one species into a completely unrelated species through specific genetic engineering, optimizing agricultural performance" (Philips). This process uses three main components, the gene wanted, the organism it is being inserted in, and something to carry the gene to the organism. This allows wanted genes to be inserted into a completely unrelated organism. These products are in grocery stores around the world and millions of people are consuming them every day. In 2012, eighty-eight percent of corn and nighty-four percent of soy was genetically modified (World Health Organization). This topic carries serious ethical significance since most of the population consumes genetically modified organisms every day. Most farmers choose to partner with Monsanto, the largest GMO company in the world, because it saves farmers money, energy, and also creates more food in a short amount of time. Monsanto argues that the small harm to humans or the environment is out weighted by the opportunity to reduce world hunger and farming costs. There are several arguments favoring genetically modified organisms, however, they are known to cause allergic reactions, increased toxicity, cross breeding, super weeds, and unethical suing.

One harm to humans caused by genetically modified organisms is unexpected allergic reactions. These allergic reactions are a serious medical condition affecting up to fifteen million people in the United States alone ("GMO: Harmful Effects."). Food allergies from genetically modified organisms are caused by a protein from the original species entering the new species and causing a new response that may trigger an unexpected allergic reaction when it enters the body. For example, people allergic to Brazil nuts had allergic reactions to soy beans modified with Brazil nut gene. It has been proven that soon after genetically modified soy was introduced to the United Kingdom, soy allergies increased by fifty percent ("GMO: Harmful Effects."). People with deadly or harmful food allergies want to be informed of genetically modified foods, so they could avoid them, or be prepared if anything were to happen.

Increased toxicity is also a large concern from genetically engineered food, adding new genes to a plant could raise toxicity that could be dangerous for human health. Almost every plant produces a chemical that is toxic to the human body, but plants eaten by humans have a low enough toxicity that they don't cause any harm. Adding certain genes that help against drought, herbicide, and disease tolerance can cause the plants to produce higher levels of toxicity.  For example, potatoes that have been modified for increased disease resistance have produced higher levels of glycoalkaloids available for human digestion. Glycoalkaloid is a chemical produced by potato plants that in large amounts can cause mild gastrointestinal effects, such as nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, stomach cramps, and headache. The higher level of glycoalkaloid is due to the insertion of a new gene that harms original genes of the potato, allowing the plant to produce more toxins (Lawley). Thirty-seven Americans were killed, and five-thousand were injured, in the late 1980's due to a toxic food supplement using genetically modified bacteria (Smith). Most people don't realize this problem until it is too late. Labeling GMOs will allow consumers to avoid increased toxicity if they are concerned.  

According to studies, a large portion of genetically modified foods on the market have lower nutritional value than organic products (Cook). In some cases, adding new genes into a plant will make nutrients and proteins indigestible and unavailable for humans. A particular kind of soybean that was genetically modified produced a lower amount of phytoestrogen. Phytoestrogen is a chemical compound that had been proven help protect from cancer and heart attacks (Cook). Adding more genes to these grains can increase the amount of phytate it produces and therefore decreasing the amount of nutrients it provides. Phytate, a chemical commonly found in grains, binds minerals and proteins and makes them unsusceptible for the human body. Therefore, the more phytate in the food, the less nutritious it is (Cook). Some peoples' diets rely on highly nutritious foods. Not labeling genetically modified grains and other foods may prevent people from gaining the nutrients they need for their body because they are unaware. 

Few studies with genetically modified organisms have been done on humans, but    animals studies give a cause for concern. For example, genetically modified potatoes fed to rats for an extended period of time caused excessive growth of lining in the gut, which looked similar to a pre-cancerous condition seen in humans (The NonGMO Project).  It has been proven that rats fed genetically modified corn their whole life, twenty-four months, had problems with their liver and kidney, and higher fat content in their blood. This is the same type of corn that contains high levels of B.t., the herbicide resistant gene, which humans consume in almost all products containing wheat (The NonGMO Project). Through this experiment it is seen that the product is harmful to animal organs, which are commonly used to research effects on human organs. By labeling GMOs, humans can avoid long term health risks if they feel worried. Harm to humans is not the only problem noticed, the environment is also often put under stress due to genetically modified organisms. 

If GMO companies, such as Monsanto, aren't careful with their seeds, they can interfere with the natural cycle of life and harm other organisms, such as small insects and animals. This happens when pollen is blown from a field of genetically modified organisms, such as corn, to a field full of another crop, such as milkweed. Then, animals and insects consume the pollen of the genetically modified corn off the milkweed and are killed due to the chemicals found in genetically modified pollen. This continuously effects nature, since when one species dies off it changes the entire environment. A study done by Theresa Philips proved that the B.t. corn pollen, when consumed, cause a high death rate in monarch butterflies and caterpillars. The B.t. toxin found in corn is made to kill parasites that damage the production and quality of corn. This B.t. toxin kills harmless insects that consume it randomly (Philips). The environmental problems don't stop their, super weeds also cause havoc on farming land. 

 When creating new plants, it is a concern that these plants will cross breed with    weeds growing close to them, creating "superweeds", weeds that can no longer be killed by herbicides. Plants are being changed slightly to be herbicide resistant. So, when herbicides are sprayed to kill weeds near crops, the food is not killed or affected. This causes concern because even though the new gene is helping farmers rid their fields of weeds, in some cases it is back firing and creating weeds that can no longer be killed by normal herbicide. Is costing farmers millions of dollars to get rid of them. Fourteen species of "superweeds" have been reported in the United States alone (Meyer). Instead of promoting sustainable weed control, scientists are creating new genetically modified organisms that are able to withstand multiple herbicides combined, which just extends and worsens the problem. Labeling genetically modified organisms would allow consumers to avoid products that cause these kinds of environmental problems. Lastly, innocent farmers are being taken advantage of by large companies. 

Monsanto has recently been suing organic family owned farmers for patent infringement, or "stealing" their GMO seeds. Monsanto is an agricultural biotechnology corporation based in the United States. They are the largest supplier of genetically modified seeds in the world, accounting for ninety percent of the seeds globally in 2003 (Monsanto). Monsanto hires botanists to engineer and produce seeds that are genetically enhanced with traits that are desired by farmers. These seeds generally contain genes that help with herbicide, insecticide, drought, cold, and disease resistance. The company then sells the rights to their genetically modified seeds to farmers and companies around the world, which allows the farmers to grow crops with the seeds. In an unethical attempt for money, Monsanto is now suing the smaller companies for "stealing" their seeds. In reality, the GMO seeds have blown from Monsanto based farms to organic farms, a few fields down. After winning the legal battle, they take their land and their business from right under them. This issue has occurred dozens of times in the last several years, and is obviously an ethical concern. Consumers or farmers who disagree with Monsanto's ethics would be able to avoid their foods if they were marked on packaging.  

It is apparent that genetically modified organisms are causing harms to the environment and humans. There are some solutions for solving this problem. An alternative to GMO crops is innovative farming methods that minimize or eliminate the need for costly and harmful pesticides and herbicides. Some examples are crop rotation, using a variety of different crops each year, and cover crops. Also using the thousands of traditional food crops that are naturally adapted to stresses such as harsh weather conditions is a substitute. If companies would use these types of products, there would be no need to create organisms that possess these features. Creating a buffer zone around the GMO fields so that none of the pollen can escape is another solution. Companies aware of these problems claim that the crop rotation or the buffer zone would be an extra cost and seem uninterested on the affect their farming has on other organisms. For farmers who still choose to utilize GMOs, another solution is available. 

The main solution to this problem is labeling the products that contain genetically modified ingredients. This way, consumers know what is in their food and can make a conscious decision whether they eat GMOs. In 2013 "sixty-one countries with over forty percent of the population" had already required labeling of GMO products being sold (Cook). In 2000 an international GMO trade agreement took place, requiring all exports of genetically modified crops to be labeled (World Health Organization). Western European companies are way ahead of the United States, the entire EU has begun requiring GMO labeling on products. Nine out of ten people, who are aware of the affects of GMOs in the United States, are asking for the packaging of processed products to be labeled "genetically modified" if GMO seeds where used (Colicchio). Allowing people to have their own opinions and make their own choices is a standing principle in this country, therefore the labeling of these products is fundamental to allowing people to choose whether they want to consume the modified organisms or not. Even though polls consistently show that a significant majority of Americans want labeling, big food manufactures are making large campaign contributions to Washington in order to keep information from the public. Companies are unwilling to abide by these requests from consumers and government officials. 

The reason that Monsanto, other large companies employing genetically modified seeds, claim they do not want to label their product is because it will be expensive. Labeling would consist of companies being regulated by the Food and Drug Administration and the United States Department of Agricultural, as well as testing of ingredients, which could be pricey. Regulations by the FDA would have to be paid for and companies of GMOs would have to write and published a detailed report informing the public of this new process and what genetically modified organisms are. Although the process of labeling includes higher costs, consumers knowing what is in their food is more important. It is also apparent that companies aren't just nervous about the money. Some companies are resistant because they believe that labeling products will alienate and scare away consumers because of the effect on human health and nature. However, over the past two years, company transparency has actually proven to be more popular. Local and state government has been pushing for legislation that mandates labeling. Recently, one battle has been conquered.  

Beginning in July 2016, Vermont will be the first state that requires disclosure of genetically modified ingredients. Vermont Governor, Peter Shumlin, states that "consumers have the right to know" (Shumlin). He also assures to concerned companies that by labeling a product, it does not propose negative or positive thoughts towards GMOs. Govenor Shumlin only believes that consumers have again and again been denied their rights because legislators are scared to be sued. He decided it had gone on long enough and signed the legislation (Shumlin). Government officials and supporters are hoping that Vermont signing legislation will get the ball rolling for all other states and eventually influence the federal government to set a standard that is mandatory. Campbell's Soup is also recently breaking from the norm. Now, they will become the first major food company to begin disclosing the presence of genetically engineered ingredients like corn, soy, and sugar in it's products (Strom). Previous of this decision, this multibillion dollar company had been paying more than a million dollars to fight efforts of required labeling in California and Washington. Campbell is hoping other large companies follow in their foot steps. They are also calling for federal action to make a mandatory and uniform labeling system of foods.  

With progress in genetic engineering over the last decade, farmers and scientists have changed the way in which food is grown and made. This has caused us to raise questions about these methods and their possible risks and effects. Genetically modified foods seem to be the ideal solution for increasing the worlds food supply and helping the poor. However, they have long term effects on the health and ethics of both people and the environment such as allergic reactions, increased toxicity, cross breeding, super weeds, and unjustifiable lawsuits. Since this topic effects almost the entire population of the United States and most of the world, a solution is needed to reduce harm. Since more than "eighty-eight percent of corn and nighty-four percent of soy was genetically modified," it would be almost impossible to eliminate all genetically modified organism (World Health Organization). By requiring mandatory labeling nation wide on products with genetically modified ingredients, people will be able to make their own choices about genetically modified organisms. We must continue education on this issue and an urge for legislation if we want to make a difference. Labeling the products will take time and money, but more importantly it will save thousands of lives and give consumers the well deserved right to know. 

