In our current world, it seems as though everything is modified and nothing is natural. GMOs, or genetically modified organisms, are taking over the world of food. With cancer rates on the rise, everyone is trying to take preventative measures to decrease their risk of falling subject to cancer. GMOs are widespread throughout the food industry, and therefore are challenging to avoid. While the FDA approves genetically modified organisms, many people are still skeptical. Since the study of effects of genetically modified organisms are relatively new science, people want to know: do GMOs cause cancer?

To get a base down, GMOs are organisms whose genetic makeup is altered in a laboratory. This is done through gene splicing, which is where genes of one species are inserted into another species. This is widely used in order for plants to develop resistance to pests, weeds, and other diseases. What effect do these GMOs have on our bodies?

Currently there are no restrictions on genetically modified organisms and therefore, farmers and scientists are free to produce and distribute as many GMOs as they wish. When comparing regular crops to genetically engineered crops, The University of California, Santa Cruz found that GMOs use the land more efficiently. Furthermore, genetically modified food has a longer shelf life, which therefore makes distribution easier. I believe that a longer shelf life could lead to a sustainable way to feed people across the world. While these gains seem great, the fear of cancer tends to overpower the benefits. Additionally, I think that all of these benefits and a lack of regulation on GMOs may cause scientists and farmers to abuse genetically engineered organisms.

Though scientists have been manipulating the genomes of food for several decades, connecting GMOs to cancer is remotely new research. As a professor in New York and a crop and soil scientist at Washington State University, Dr. Philip Landrigan and Charles Benbrook believe that while GMOs may not directly cause cancer in humans, the herbicides used to treat these crops may be a threat to our species. This is an example of correlation not equaling causation, which we discussed in class. I think that many Americans previously believed that since cancer rates rose along with the consumption of GMOs, that genetically modified organisms were causing cancer. However, a 2012 study shows that there is a third variable involved, which is the herbicides. Because these herbicides only kill the weeds and not the crops, the crops endure a fair amount of herbicides and pesticides when farmers attempt to exterminate the surrounding weeds. The well known weed-killer, Roundup, was commonly used in farms throughout the world. This herbicide contains glyphosate, which the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified as a “probable human carcinogen.” While it has not been tested on humans, Gilles-Eric Seralini tested the effects of glyphosate on 200 male and female albino Sprague-Dawley rats in a laboratory for two years. He found that exposure to the glyphosate lead to tumors in the rodents. Therefore, scientists assumed that it could have the same effect on humans.

With genetically modified corn being such a strong base in American’s diets, it seems surprising that we are not dying from cancer at a much higher rate. This thought attracted scientists to reexamine the results of these former studies, which led to the disproval of their results. Upon reading the reports of Gilles-Eric Seralini’s study that was published in September 2012 in Food and Chemical Toxicology, Steven Salzberg found the study to be poorly designed, and that the report ignores details that refute the findings. He also discovered that the control group only accounted for 10% of the total 200 rats. I believe that this could be due to multiple reasons, such as the scientists who conducted the experiment having their own secret agenda. This could cause them to create biased procedures, which would therefore skew the results. Something else that I found interesting about the study was that it did not explain at what rate the rats exposed to glyphosate got cancer compared to the control group. The experiment was eventually taken down after numerous experts followed up on the data and proved it to be false.

Thus far, all evidence leads us to believe that GMOs do not cause cancer, and neither do the herbicides used to treat them. I think that the experiment with rats could have been very beneficial if it were conducted correctly. Having non-biased scientists perform the experiment and evenly dividing the control and experimental groups would greatly reduce the chances for error in the experiment. Currently, we have no reason to suspect that GMOs cause cancer, and therefore consuming them should not be detrimental to our species.