• GMO foods are prevalent in the average U.S. consumer’s diet, used in many processed products.
• Improved from more rudimentary plant and animal modification, GMO technology aims to target specific genes to improve foods. 
• Its consumption is shrouded in much controversy due to concerns over corporate practice, health and environmental impacts. 

Chipotle announced its commitment to go “GMO-free” in March 2013. Some consumers praised Chipotle’s decision, but many nutrition experts argued that genetically modified organisms are safe for consumption. Today, around 70% of processed foods on shelves and over 90% of staple crops, like soybeans and corn, have been genetically altered. Each product reflects a complex scientific history and an ongoing ethical debate. 

According to the World Health Organization, GMOs are “organisms whose genetic material has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally.” A Pew Research Center study found that 37% of adults in the United States say that GMO foods are safe for consumption, showing that debates over their safety and sustainability remain. 

“There’s a lot of public distrust,” senior and Culinary Arts Club president Andrew Wu said. “A lot of people get their information from social media. They don’t want to take time to read actual scientific literature.”

The concept of genetically modifying organisms is not new. Ancient civilizations in Mesoamerica and South Asia used basic forms of genetic modification, like crossbreeding similar species. Meanwhile, GMO technology allows scientists to select specific genes and combine traits from unrelated species. 

“In my opinion, and based on actual cases, the risk of genetically engineered crops is most likely less than that of conventional plant breeding,” said Stanley Kowalski, a University of New Hampshire law professor with a Ph.D. in plant breeding. “In these breeding programs, there can be hundreds if not thousands of genes moving back and forth with totally unknown outcomes, as opposed to genetic engineering, in which there may be one or two manipulated gene constructs.” 

Humanitarian benefits lie at the forefront of pro-GMO arguments. Emerging in the late 20th century, the technology was celebrated as a possible fix to world hunger, boosting produce output by strengthening pest resistance in plants. Genetic resistance could also potentially lower environmental pollution caused by pesticides: GMO cultivation has reduced pesticide application worldwide by 776 million kilograms per year.

In the U.S., commercial GMOs began with the 1994 Flavr Savr tomato. Its manufacturer submitted safety data to the Food and Drug Administration for a scientific review, though the FDA did not require formal approval. 

“It’s true that a lot of GMO creation is for commercial values and making money,” University of Hawai’i environmental researcher Camiel Doorenweerd said. “It would be ideal if you could give people a more complete overview of what they’re buying. In the supermarket, you might see two tomatoes and reach for the one that looks better, but it’s actually modified to have a longer shelf life and the one next to it is more nutritious. But you can’t find those details on the label.”

Public skepticism of GMOs stems from concerns about corporate practices and potential health and environmental effects. Around 56% of the global seed market is controlled by four biotechnology companies: Bayer, Syngenta, Corteva and BASF. Consumers worry about a potential monopoly on agriculture.

“People think that companies think about your health,” said Michelle Perro, co-founder and CEO of nonprofit organization GMOscience. “They’re not thinking about your health. They’re thinking about their bottom line: money. The seed cost has exponentially risen for farmers, because they get locked into a cycle of using these products and having to keep buying a new license every year and paying new seed fees to these major companies.”

While there are concerns about large corporations controlling seed prices and distribution, some suggest the ends may justify the means. 

“Genetic engineering companies like Bayer Crop Science and Pioneer Hi-Bred International have large markets,” Kowalski said. “And yes, they have patents that exclude others from their technology for a specific period of time. But ultimately, they are serving the public good with advanced agricultural innovations, like improved nutrition, higher yields and soil conservation.”

Some consumers and medical physicians associate GMOs with potential risks to trigger bodily reactions like allergies. Modulating a gene in a sequence causes the need to reassemble genetic material downstream in a process called chromothripsis, Perro said. This process is not precise and may cause the formation of foreign proteins that may trigger an immune response.

Environmental concerns include the potential for “superweeds,” or hybrids between weeds and herbicide-resistant crops, which can disrupt ecosystems. As a result, organizations such as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth actively campaign against GMO foods. 

“Peaceful protests are a healthy way to bring awareness to this issue,” Wu said. “GMO isn’t perfect. There’s still issues with it, like environmental concerns.”

The U.S. assesses the safety of GMOs through three agencies: the FDA, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. However, many are concerned that this evaluation is not thorough enough. Self-affirmed “non-GMO” labels now frequently appear, granted not by federal regulations but by third-party organizations like the Non-GMO Project. 

“I know right now, people are getting more aware of the ingredient labels on food items,” Wu said. “But there’s also a lot of misinformation out there. It’s important for people to understand what GMO is, so they know what they’re buying.”

Global GMO production has increased by 1.9% from 2023 to 2024. New projects, like drought-resistant crops, have emerged despite pushback. Now, gene editing is taught in Lynbrook biology classes to familiarize students with this growing field.

“We apply gene editing to medicine and genetic disorders as well as food crops,” science teacher Jason Lee said. “If people better understood the process, then they might be more accepting of the outcome. We aim to educate students in classrooms in FUHSD so they at least have a better understanding.”