FAQs about Genetically Modified Organisms in Food

Read our report Roundup Revealed: Glyphosate in our Food System to learn more.

What are Genetically Modified Organisms?

Back to top

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), also known as Genetically Engineered (GE) organisms, are plants or animals in which genetic material (DNA) has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally through breeding and/or natural recombination.
The promise of GE crops was that they would decrease pesticide use, improve nutrition, and increase drought tolerance, among others benefits. Yet, the majority of GE crops have not been engineered to provide these beneficial characteristics. Roughly 99% of GE crop acreage planted in the U.S. expresses at least one herbicide-resistant gene, an insecticide-producing gene, or both. The herbicide used is usually glyphosate (the main ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide RoundupTM).(1) Glyphosate use has skyrocketed as GE crops have become more widespread.(2)
The main GE crops in the U.S. are corn, soybeans, cotton, canola, sugar beets, and alfalfa.(3) Approximately half of U.S. cropland is planted with GE corn, soybeans, and cotton.(4)The adoption of herbicide-resistant GE crops in the U.S. is responsible for the massive increase in glyphosate application over the last two decades, (5)as well as a host of environmental impacts associated with this increase.

Why should shareholders be concerned about GMO use?

Back to top

The GMO crops grown in the U.S. do not enhance yields or nutrition; instead, they have been genetically altered so that they can withstand more pesticides or they constantly produce their own (see “What are the effects of GMOs?”). The companies that produce GMOs do not currently pay for the environmental and economic impacts of their products. These unaccounted-for costs are an example of the financial risk of GMOs.
Similarly, companies that make consumer food products are exposed to the risks associated with sourcing GMO ingredients for products, as consumers are increasingly aware of the environmental, public health, and food security impacts of GMOs. 90-93% of Americans support GMO labeling, according to several polls by national news and research organizations over the last several years.(6)
The food industry has begun to respond to widespread criticism of GMOs. After an intense consumer campaign, General Mills reformulated its original Cheerios cereal in January 2014. Other brands that have announced reformulation include Hershey Chocolate Bars and Kisses, (7)Post’s Grape Nuts, Kellogg’s Kashi, Ben & Jerry’s (a subsidiary of Unilever), Boulder Brands’ Smart Balance, and Chipotle Mexican Grill. (8)This movement away from GMOs has been enhanced by GMO-free labelling. Products that do not carry such a label may be at a competitive disadvantage.
After shareholder pressure resulted in GMO labeling for all house brand products, Whole Foods Market announced that all foods in its stores would be subject to GMO labeling in 2018. (9)The company sees this as an enormous brand differentiator and a clear win for investors and customers. The company also notes that Non-GMO Project Verified products experience a 15-30% sales increase.(10)
Local and state movements to regulate GMOs have been gaining momentum, increasing the financial risk for companies producing or using GMOs. (See the next section: “How are GMOs regulated?”)

Are GMOs adequately regulated?

Back to top

The development of GE grass and other biotech crops demonstrate the limitations of current regulation. In the U.S., the USDA is tasked with regulation of genetically modified organisms; the EPA is separately responsible for assessing the health and environmental impacts of GMOs.
GMOs are labeled or banned in 64 countries including the European Union, India, Russia, China, and Japan; (11)the U.S. passed a law requiring GMO labeling in 2016, but consumers will need to use a smartphone to scan each product’s “QR code” — those small square codes on most products — to get that information.
Recently, revolutionary bio-technologies have arrived that supercharge the ability of companies to tinker with DNA. For example, CRISPR is a new technique that makes it quick, easy, and cheap to edit the genes of a living organism; it has been called a “scalpel for DNA”. Organisms engineered through CRISPR do not fall within USDA’s current regulatory authority which is limited to organisms created by splicing genes from “plant pests.” CRISPR manipulates the organism’s own DNA, rather than splicing genes from other organisms, so USDA has declined to regulate many new genetically engineered crops, such as glyphosate-resistant Kentucky bluegrass. (12)This means no agency is minding the store when it comes to new modes of genetic engineering, allowing new organisms to be released into the environment with unknown and potentially devastating impacts to the environment and other crops.
GMOs have always been lightly regulated by USDA. (13)Now even that minimal regulation is disappearing, as the floodgates open.

What are the negative effects of GMOs?

Back to top

Over the past two decades, use of genetically engineered crops has dramatically increased use of harmful pesticides. Widespread use these pesticides endangers farmworkers, rural communities, and the public at large, as well as threatens pollinators and entire ecosystems.

Effects on Agriculture and the Environment

  • Widespread use of Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready” GM crops, which are engineered to tolerate Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup, has led to an epidemic of herbicide-resistant weeds, requiring an ever-increasing amount of herbicides, including more toxic herbicides, to combat them.(14)
  • The United States House of Representatives’ Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held hearings in 2010, titled “Are Superweeds an Outgrowth of USDA Biotech Policy?”, to investigate herbicide-resistance and crop contamination.(15)
      • Troy Roush, an Indiana farmer who is Vice President of the National Corn Grower Association, testified that “bigger farms with multiple herbicide resistance problems are in great danger… The increased ease of use and convenience of herbicide tolerant crops enabled many farmers to significantly increase crop acreage which helped to offset higher production costs and, in some cases, lower yields. Biotech companies encouraged farm expansion by offering discounts for buying seed in bulk… Farmers who expanded farm size are now finding it difficult, if not impossible, to manage the larger operations now that additional time is required for weed management.”
  • In 2013, the New York Times reported that the corn disease Goss’ Wilt is “a tidal wave washing across the Corn Belt” and plant pathologists suspect the biggest factor is genetically modified corn.(16)
    • • Newsweek reported in 2014 that “one of industrial agriculture’s biggest GMO crops may have just backfired” because “corn-destroying rootworms have evolved to be resistant to the Bt corn engineered to kill them.” (17)
  • In 2013, the New York Times reported that the corn disease Goss’ Wilt is “a tidal wave washing across the Corn Belt” and plant pathologists suspect the biggest factor is genetically modified corn.(17)
  • Newsweek reported in 2014 that “one of industrial agriculture’s biggest GMO crops may have just backfired” because “corn-destroying rootworms have evolved to be resistant to the Bt corn engineered to kill them.”(31)
  • • In response to the serious and growing problems generated by widespread use of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready crops, Dow Chemical has introduced new GM crops resistant to 2,4-D, a toxic herbicide used in the Vietnam War-era defoliant Agent Orange. 2,4-D is prone to drift, and is already responsible for more episodes of crop injury than any other herbicide. (18) Monsanto is also now introducing crops that are resistant to both glyphosate and dicamba. (19)Dicamba is responsible for the third-highest number of crop damage incidents due to pesticide drift in the U.S., (20)and has been associated with increased risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in farmers.(21)
    • Many researchers believe that the chemical arms race is impossible to win, making disengagement from herbicide-resistant crops the only sensible policy.(22)
  • GM crops exacerbate the agricultural practice of monoculture, in which a single crop is grown over a wide area for many consecutive years. Monoculture is used widely in modern industrial agriculture; its implementation has allowed for large harvests from minimal labor, but has also led to the quicker spread of pests and diseases, because uniform crops are more susceptible to pathogens.(23) Advocates of polyculture (a principle of permaculture) and organic farming contend that greater crop diversity and pesticide reduction (or elimination) create more secure and healthy agricultural systems.(24)

Effects on Public Health
The vast majority of GMOs are engineered to tolerate direct application of herbicides, primarily glyphosate, dicamba, and 2,4-D. These herbicides are associated with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other health impacts. To learn more, read our report Roundup Revealed: Glyphosate in the Food System.

Effects on Farmers and Small Business
The global agrochemical industry is dominated by a handful of large companies that sell patented and genetically engineered seeds and pesticides: Monsanto, Dow Chemical, DuPont, Syngenta, Bayer, and BASF (the “Big Six”). Over the past year, these firms have further consolidated. Dow and DuPont agreed to merge (and split their common divisions into three specialized companies), and are awaiting anti-trust clearance in the U.S.; China National Chemical Corporation has been cleared by U.S. regulators to purchase Syngenta; and in September 2016, Bayer reached an agreement to purchase Monsanto. (25) These deals, which have yet to win final approval, have been driven in part by falling sales(26) and the synergy between sales of herbicide and herbicide-resistant crop seeds.
These consolidation deals have prompted concern and outrage in many quarters. As the Big Six agrochemical companies merge, farmers suspect that even less competition will lead to higher prices and fewer choices of seeds. The pesticide industry is already highly concentrated and uncompetitive: the top four firms accounted for 58% of the global seed market in 2011. Collectively that year, the Big Six also controlled 77% of the global pesticide market.(27)
The synergy between herbicides and biotechnology is a major driving force in consolidation. For example, Monsanto owns the industry’s leading seed business and Bayer has the world’s second largest chemicals business.(28) Together, Monsanto and Bayer will be able to develop genetically engineered seeds that tolerate multiple herbicides sold by the company.

Do we need GMOs to feed the world?

Back to top

There is broad consensus that genetic engineering is not helpful or necessary to feed the world’s population, in the near- or long-term future. Many research institutions and international organizations report that organic, agro-ecological, and non-GMO farming practices are more beneficial to food security, public health, and the environment.

  • The Rodale Institute’s 30-year study found that organic farming used less energy, produced less greenhouse gas, and outperformed chemical and GMO farming during droughts.(29)
  • The United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization has recognized that “organic agriculture has the potential to secure a global food supply, just as conventional agriculture does today, but with reduced environmental impact.(30)
  • Similarly, United Nations food and pollution experts issued a report declaring that pesticides are not necessary to feed the world and that hunger is primarily caused by poverty, inequality, and poor food distribution. The report warns of catastrophic consequences if current pesticide-oriented farming practices continue and criticizes pesticide manufacturers for systematic denial of harms and unethical marketing tactics.(31)
  • The 2008 International Assessment of Agriculture Science and Technology for Development, which was initiated by the World Bank and the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, concluded that GMOs are unlikely to address persistent hunger and poverty. Instead, the report describes comprehensive policies to reorient local and global food systems towards greater social equity and ecological sustainability.(32)
  • The U.N. Commission on Trade and Development’s 2013 review concluded that transformative changes are needed in food, agricultural, and trade systems to increase biodiversity, reduce pesticides, support small-scale farmers, and strengthen local food systems.(33)
  • A 2017 study of 1,000 farms in France concluded that virtually all the farms could significantly cut their pesticide use while still producing the same quantity of food.(34)

Where can I learn more?

Back to top

For more research and other resources related to GMOs, visit our Resources page, and sort by GMOs.

Citations

Back to top

  1. “Three crops (corn, cotton, and soybeans) make up the bulk of the acres planted to GE crops. U.S. farmers planted about 169 million acres of these GE crops in 2013, or about half of total land used to grow crops… U.S. farmers used HT [herbicide-tolerant] soybeans on 93 percent of all planted soybean acres in 2013. HT corn accounted for 85 percent of corn acreage in 2013, and HT cotton constituted 82 percent of cotton acreage. Farmers planted insect-resistant (Bt) cotton… on 75 percent of U.S. acreage in 2013. Bt corn… was planted on 76 percent of corn acres in 2013.” P. 5-6 Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge et al, “Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States,” United State Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Economic Research Service (ERS), February 2014, https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details/?pubid=45182.
  2. Benbrook, Charles M, “Trends in glyphosate herbicide use in the United States and globally,” Environmental Sciences Europe 28:3 (2016), DOI 10.1186/s12302-016-0070-0,http://www.enveurope.com/content/pdf/s12302-016-0070-0.pdf.
  3. “Recent Trends in GE Adoption,” United State Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Economic Research Service (ERS), Updated July 9, 2015, accessed July 30, 2015, http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/adoption-of-genetically-engineered-crops-in-the-us/recent-trends-in-ge-adoption.aspx.
  4. See: (a) Benbrook, Charles M, “Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use in the U.S. — the first sixteen years,” Environmental Sciences Europe (2012), DOI: 10.1186/2190-4715-24-24, http://enveurope.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/2190-4715-24-24. (b) Benbrook, Charles M, “Trends in glyphosate herbicide use in the United States and globally,” Environ Sciences Europe 28:3 (2016), DOI 10.1186/s12302-016-0070-0, http://www.enveurope.com/content/pdf/s12302-016-0070-0.pdf.<> (c) “Superweeds: How Biotech Crops Bolster the Pesticide Industry,” Food & Water Watch, 2013, http://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/doc/Superweeds.pdf#_ga=1.128841160.579824097.1403638483. (d) “Agronomic and environmental aspects of the cultivation of genetically modified herbicide-resistant plants,” German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BFN), 2014, accessed August 18, 2015, http://www.bfn.info/fileadmin/MDB/documents/service/skript362.pdf.
  5. See: (a) New York Times, July 27 2013, “Strong Support for Modified Foods,” http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/28/science/strong-support-for-labeling-modified-foods.html?_r=3&&gwh=D5B7AC4AB592DE4BB119357F93E99FB8&gwt=pay. (b) Consumers Union, 2014, “New Consumer Reports Poll Shows Consumer Demand for Strong Federal Standards for Genetically Engineered Food,” http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/28/science/strong-support-for-labeling-modified-foods.html?_r=3&&gwh=D5B7AC4AB592DE4BB119357F93E99FB8&gwt=pay. (c) Center for Food Safety, 2012, “GMO (GE) Labeling Polls,” http://www.cga.ct.gov/2012/ENVdata/Tmy/2012HB-05117-R000222-Fairfield%20Green%20Food%20Guide,%20LLC—Analiese%20Paik5-TMY.PDF.
  6. http://www.cga.ct.gov/2012/ENVdata/Tmy/2012HB-05117-R000222-Fairfield%20Green%20Food%20Guide,%20LLC—Analiese%20Paik5-TMY.PDF.
  7. National Public Radio: The Salt Blog, July 22 2014, “Some Food Companies Are Quietly Dumping GMOs Ingredients,”http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2014/07/22/333725880/some-food-producers-are-quietly-dumping-gmo-ingredients.
  8. Whole Foods Market, March 8 2013, “GMO Labeling Coming to Whole Foods Market,” http://www.wholefoodsmarket.com/blog/gmo-labeling-coming-whole-foods-market.
  9. Whole Foods Market, March 8 2013, “GMO Labeling Coming to Whole Foods Market,” http://www.wholefoodsmarket.com/blog/gmo-labeling-coming-whole-foods-market.
  10. Center for Food Safety, 2014, “International Labeling Laws” http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/issues/976/ge-food-labeling/international-labeling-laws
  11. (a) Chang, Kenneth, “These Foods Aren’t Genetically Modified but They Are ‘Edited,’ ” The New York Times, Jan. 9, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/09/science/genetically-edited-foods-crispr.html (b) Pollack, Andrew, “By Editing Plant Genes, Companies Avoid Regulation,” The New York Times, Jan. 1, 2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/02/business/energy-environment/a-gray-area-in-regulation-of-genetically-modified-crops.html.
  12. See Callahan, Patricia, “EPA tosses aside safety data, says Dow pesticide for GMOs won’t harm people,” The Chicago Tribune, Dec. 8, 2015, http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/watchdog/ct-gmo-crops-pesticide-resistance-met-20151203-story.html.
  13. (a) Chang, Kenneth, “These Foods Aren’t Genetically Modified but They Are ‘Edited,’ ” The New York Times, Jan. 9, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/09/science/genetically-edited-foods-crispr.html (b) Pollack, Andrew, “By Editing Plant Genes, Companies Avoid Regulation,” The New York Times, Jan. 1, 2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/02/business/energy-environment/a-gray-area-in-regulation-of-genetically-modified-crops.html.
  14. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Jul. 28 2010, “Are ‘Superweeds’ an Outgrowth of USDA Biotech Policy? (Part I),”http://oversight.house.gov/hearing/are-superweeds-an-outgrowth-of-usda-biotech-policy-part-i/.
  15. New York Times, Sep. 20 2013, “A Disease Cuts Corn Yields,”http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/01/science/earth/a-disease-cuts-corn-yields.html?_r=0.
  16. Newsweek, Mar. 18 2014, “Worm Now Thrives in GMO Corn Designed to Kill It, Study Says” http://www.newsweek.com/worm-now-thrives-gmo-corn-designed-kill-it-study-says-232276.
  17. Op. id., Center for Food Safety, 2012 http://www.newsweek.com/worm-now-thrives-gmo-corn-designed-kill-it-study-says-232276.
  18. Johnson, William G. et al, “2,4-D- and Dicamba-tolerant Crops — Some Facts to Consider,” Purdue Extension, November 2012, accessed October 17, 2015,https://extension.purdue.edu/extmedia/ID/ID-453-W.pdf.
  19. Ishii-Eiteman, Marcia, “The “Big 6” drifting to a farm near you,” Pesticide Action Network, Jan. 21, 2016, accessed March 27, 2017, http://www.panna.org/blog/big-6-drifting-farm-near-you.
  20. McDuffie HH et al, “Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and specific pesticide exposures in men: cross-Canada study of pesticides and health”, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 10 (Nov. 2001): 1155-63, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11700263.
  21. Mortensen, D.A. et al, 2012, “Navigating a Critical Juncture for Sustainable Weed Management” (BioScience), http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.1525/bio.2012.62.1.12?uid=3739560&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21103567216211.
  22. Altieri, M.A., 2000, “Modern Agriculture: Ecological impacts and the possibilities for truly sustainable farming” (Agroecology in Action), http://nature.berkeley.edu/~miguel-alt/modern_agriculture.html.
  23. “Counting on Agroecology: Why We Should Invest More in the Transition to Sustainable Agriculture (2015),” Union of Concerned Scientists, 2015, http://www.ucsusa.org/food-agriculture/advance-sustainable-agriculture/counting-on-agroecology.
  24. Purdy, Chase, “Six companies are about to merge into the biggest farm-business oligopoly in history,” QZ, Sept. 20, 2016, http://qz.com/786382/monsanto-bayer-dupont-dow-chemical-and-syngenta-defend-their-coming-oligopoly-mon-dd-dow-syt/.
  25. Purdy, Chase, “Six companies are about to merge into the biggest farm-business oligopoly in history,” QZ, Sept. 20, 2016, http://qz.com/786382/monsanto-bayer-dupont-dow-chemical-and-syngenta-defend-their-coming-oligopoly-mon-dd-dow-syt/.
  26. Philpott, Tom, “Move Over, Monsanto: The Pesticide and GMO Seed Industry Just Spawned a New Behemoth,” Mother Jones, Dec. 14, 2015, http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2015/12/dupont-dow-merger-spwans-new-pesticidegmo-seed-behemoth.
  27. Roumeliotis, Greg and Ludwig Burger, “Bayer to Buy Monsanto, Creating a Massive Seeds and Pesticides Company,” Scientific American, accessed Mar 28, 2017, https://www.scientificamerican.com/section/reuters/bayer-to-buy-monsanto-creating-a-massive-seeds-and-pesticides-company/.
  28. Rodale Institute, 2011, The Farming Systems Trial: 30-Year Report, http://rodaleinstitute.org/our-work/farming-systems-trial/farming-systems-trial-30-year-report/.
  29. United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization, 2007, “Meeting the Food Security Challenge Through Organic Agriculture,” http://www.fao.org/NEWSROOM/EN/news/2007/1000550/index.html.
  30. Carrington, Damian, “UN experts denounce ‘myth’ pesticides are necessary to feed the world,” The Guardian, March 7, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/mar/07/un-experts-denounce-myth-pesticides-are-necessary-to-feed-the-world.
  31. Op. id., International Assessment of Agriculture Science and Technology for Development, 2008.
  32. United Nations Commission on Trade and Development, 2013, Trade and Environment Review, http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditcted2012d3_en.pdf.
  33. Carrington, Damian, “Farms could slash pesticide use without losses, research reveals,” The Guardian, April 6, 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/apr/06/farms-could-slash-pesticide-use-without-losses-research-reveals.

Back to top