Are Genetically Modified Foods Really Safe?

Are Genetically Modified Foods Really Safe? In the absence of serious studies to answer that question, there is no way to tell. But there is plenty of evidence that tends to tip the scales towards a resounding NO.

In his testimony to the Vermont State Agriculture Committee, transcribed with the title "Exposing the Dangers of Genetically Engineered Foods", Jeffrey M. Smith, author of Seeds of Deception, argues that there is serious cause for concern.

How come feeding studies are not routinely performed for each new genetically modified variety of corn, tomatoes or fish? The trick used by GM producers in collusion with legislators world wide is called substantial equivalence. Codex Alimentarius, the UN's food arm which not too long ago adopted giudelines to severely restrict international trade in vitamin and mineral food supplements, perfectly safe natural substances that are vital for human health by any standard, has made substantial equivalence of GM foods a loophole that that one could drive a truck through, giving industry carte blanche for the sale of their products. Genetically modified products can claim that they are not substantially different from their natural cousins that have proven their value through millennia of use.

The Center for International Environmental Law in Geneva ha argued in this document against adoption of the principle of substantial equivalence by Codex Alimentarius. Yet, after substantial lobbying by industry, recently adopted Codex guidelines confirm that the principle of substantial equivalence - comparing a genetically modified product to a non-GM equivalent - is to be a "starting point" for the safety assessment of GM foods. While additional testing is suggested, there are almost no studies to date to assess the health effects of GM foods on humans.

Here is Jeffrey Smith's testimony to the Vermont State Agriculture Committee.