Food Sustainability

Food is one of the basic needs of human to live. Therefore, food security is a prerequisite for building the
next generation of human capital in any country, and the right to adequate food is an internationally
recognized human right. Last September 15, 2015, the United Nations has formed the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) which contain 17 new, universal set of goals, targets and indicators that UN
member states will be expected to use to frame their agendas and political policies over the next 15 years.
The SDGs follow and expand on the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs), which were agreed by
governments in 2001 and are due to expire by the end of 2015.

Figure 1. Sustainable Development Goals

As can be seen in the figure above, food sustainability is addressed in the second goal of SDGs. Currently,
the situation of food crisis in the world is getting worse due to a large number of factors: economic,
political, climatic and environmental. Most of the victims of these food crises are countries in Africa and
other Third World Countries.

With the increasing threat of the food crisis of the world in mind, sustainability of food becomes a
challenge to all world leaders and to all of us who are consumers of food. Solutions to aid this problem
have been developed by several researchers through consultation of world leaders and examination of the
current food systems like how these food systems are affected by existing policies in the country in terms
of production, distribution and export. But first, let us define what food sustainability is.

According to United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), a sustainable food system is

characterized as an integrated system of plant and animal production practices that meet America's need
for food and fiber and enhance the natural resources that food growing depends upon. These practices
also include efficient use of nonrenewables, keeping production economically viable and enhancing both
the farmer's and society's quality of life. A sustainable food system, reconciles ecological, social and
economic imperatives, and is based on a hierarchy of nested objectives.
equitable access to local and seasonable produce
access to local, organic produce both in local markets and local supermarkets
access to diverse year-round local farmers markets
 access to local and seasonable, and organic produce sold in local supermarkets
enriches biodiversity at all levels, micro-organisms to soil to animals
minimizes animal suffering through local access to processing, thus also mitigating GHG emissions
committed to humane treatment of all animals
integrated into local restaurants, hospitals, schools and public institutions

A sustainable development path for agriculture and food systems will require
decisive and ultimately transformative changes of the global agriculture and food
system to increase food availability and utilization, improve the environment, make
human beings healthier, and create more prosperous rural communities. The
transition to sustainable development pathways for agriculture will require all
stakeholders in the food system to adapt and adopt state of the art knowledge and
technologies, and it will require trying multiple models (United Nations, 2013). One
of the technologies employed to help achieve the goals of sustainable food
development is the use of recent advances in the field of biotechnology particularly,
the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). There are a lot of solutions
proposed to attain food sustainability and these solutions cover the economic,
political and environmental areas affecting the different aspects of food. However,
this section will focus on the use of genetically modified organisms in alleviating
problems regarding food especially on production and quality. The advantages,
disadvantages and issues that created an impact on how most people view this kind
of technology.

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)

Genetically modified organism, or GMO, is defined as an organism that has had its
DNA altered or modified in some way through genetic engineering. Before forming
an opinion on genetically modified foods, one should understand what genetic
modification is and the mechanisms behind it. Moreover, a brief history of the
development of GMO technology will give us insights on how it changed the
traditional practices of agricultural industry and aid us in making decision whether
to still pursue this kind of technology or simply learn a lesson from it.

Understanding genetic modification

Every living cell has a unique set of instructions called a genome. If a genome is a
book, and the millions of chemical units of DNA are the letters, then genes are the
words. Groups of letters make up the words that tell a story or explain an idea;
likewise, different arrangements of DNA letters make up genes. The cells genes
collectively contain the instructions for how to make a cell, as well as the tools for
the cell to accomplish every task it must perform. Following this metaphor, one can
say that scientists create GMOs by precisely changing some of the letters or words
of the book or rather simply by tweaking the cells own set of instructions so that it
now behaves in a manner useful to humans (Bessen, 2015). What makes this
technology controversial is that the process of altering genes of other organisms by
humans is very artificial even though since the beginning of time nature has been
modifying genes of every organism in its own way. Nature itself has moved genes
naturally across species lines since the dawn of evolution. And we all carry within
us the seeds of our ancestral past, which includes our genetic benefactors: bacteria,
viruses, plants, fish, extinct dinosaurs and the panoply of life that we see today.
Indeed, we share 30 percent of our genome with the marigold, 60 percent with
worms and 99 percent with apes. All life is genetically tied together; we all have
common ancestors reaching deep into prehistory. In Nature, genes are just genes;
what makes them different is how they are expressed. So moving genes from one
species to another is not very radical when one understands the course of
evolutionary history (Rangel, 2015).

History of GMOs

Contrary to popular belief, humans have been experimenting with food and its
genes for a long time, even if they originally gave most of the control to nature.
Since the advent of agriculture 12,000 years ago, farmers have strived to improve
their crops durability, resistance to diseases and pests, and satisfaction to humans
as much as possible. Over the years, as humans chose certain qualities over others
in plants, they molded crops into what they wanted them to be bigger, tastier,
and juicier. According to Bruce Chasey, executive associate director of the
Biotechnology Center at the University of Illinois, we altered these plants so much
that they developed into crops that would never survive in the wild without human
care. He even stated that Plants such as strawberries, wheat, cabbage, corn, and
almost all the rest of our crops descended from ancestors that were nothing like
strawberries or wheat or corn from back in the day (Bushak, 2015).

An enormous breakthrough in GMO technology came in 1973, when Herbert Boyer

and Stanley Cohen worked together to engineer the first successful genetically
engineered (GE) organism. The two scientists developed a method to very
specifically cut out a gene from one organism and paste it into another. Using this
method, they transferred a gene that encodes antibiotic resistance from one strain
of bacteria into another, bestowing antibiotic resistance upon the recipient. One
year later, Rudolf Jaenisch and Beatrice Mintz utilized a similar procedure in animals,
introducing foreign DNA into mouse embryos (Bushak 2015).

Although this new technology opened up countless avenues of research

possibilities, immediately after its development, the media, government officials,
and scientists began to worry about the potential ramifications on human health
and Earths ecosystems. By the middle of 1974, a moratorium on GE projects was
universally observed, allowing time for experts to come together and consider the
next steps during what has come to be known as the Asilomar Conference of 1975.
At the conference, scientists, lawyers, and government officials debated the safety
of GE experiments for three days. The attendees eventually concluded that the GE
projects should be allowed to continue with certain guidelines in place (Bushak,
2015). The established guidelines were expected to be fluid, influenced by further
knowledge as the scientific community advanced. The figure below shows the
development of genetically modified organisms through time and how it was used in
many fields especially in food and medicine.

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) Controversies

The greatest controversy regarding the use of GMOs products is whether it is safe or
not. Scientists support this technology after running many tests on the products but
the question is how far these approved tests can guarantee that indeed GMOs are
safe and will not produce any bad side effects on the people who consumed them.
On the other hand, the basis of anti-GMO groups on discarding this kind of
technology is questionable because since it is unclear how they relate GMOs as the
cause of various illnesses on the consumers or on the organisms that are genetically
modified. According to the Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT), a group of
anti-GMO activists, "Genetically modified foods have been linked to toxic and
allergic reactions, sick, sterile and dead livestock, and damage to virtually every
organ studied in lab animals". Moreover, Mary Vandewiele, co-owner of The Better
Health Store, a chain of 14 health-oriented stores, says that the long-term effect of
GMOs remain unknown. In reading the literature, most of the science and myths
are not clear and appear to be intertwined. GMOs have clearly impacted our food
industry but to what extent the damage is and can be long term, appears to be
uncertain and that is a problem. (Norris, 2015)

Additionally, anti-GMOs do cite several studies that they claim prove the danger of
GMOs. One notorious study from 2012 claimed that rats that were fed GMOs
developed large tumors. The authors of the study were not as forthright in
explaining that, for their study, they used mutant rats that were genetically more
prone to developing cancer. Another researcher from Russia claimed that feeding a
diet of GMO soy to hamsters caused them to grow slower and become infertile
(Norris, 2015). These findings contradict the results of using GMO soy to livestock
by American farmers for three decades as the livestock did not show any signs of
infertility. The Russian researcher also has never published his findings in a scientific
journal, meaning no independent scientist has thoroughly analyzed his methodology
or results.

By contrast, dozens of studies demonstrating the safety of GMOs have gone through
the peer review process to ensure that their findings are accurate. One of the
studies made was to disprove the claim of IRT that rats fed with a diet containing a
GMO potato had virtually every organ system adversely affected after just ten days
of feeding. The IRT stated that the toxicity was the result of genetic modification
techniques and not a specific case for that particular potato. They claimed the
process of making the GMO caused it to be toxic and thus all GMOs were high risk
for toxicity. In order to investigate this claim of the IRT, group of scientists at the
National Institute of Toxicological Research in Seoul, Korea fed rats diets containing
either GMO potato or non-GMO potato. For each diet, they tracked male and female
rats. To carefully analyze the rats health, a histopathological examination of tissues
and organs was conducted after the rats died. Histopathology is the examination of
organs for disease at the microscopic level Histopathological examinations of the
reproductive organs, liver, kidneys, and spleen showed no differences between
GMO-eating and non-GMO-eating animals. Moreover, a study three years earlier of a
separate group reported the same results, with no differences in the vitality or
health of the animals, even at the microscopic level despite the massive ingestion
of GMO potato, tomato, or sweet pepper which is 7,000 times more than what
humans consume (Norris, 2015).

Another issue that arise with the use of GMOs is its possible effects on our next
generations. To discern whether GMO crops affect fertility or embryos during
gestation, a group from South Dakota State University again turned to studies on
rats. For this experiment, the rats were eating a type of GMO corn, more commonly
known as Bt corn. Bt stands for Bacillus thuringiensis, a microbe that produces
insecticidal endotoxin and has been used as a topical pesticide against insects since
1961. To allow corn to directly generate this endotoxin, scientists introduced a gene
from Bt into the genetic material (DNA) of corn. To determine the effects of the
buildup of toxicity over time, this group monitored the four generations of rats. For
each generation, they tracked the fertility of parents and compared the health of
the embryos from parents that ate Bt corn to those with parents that did not. The
results show that there is no significant difference between the rats that has eaten
Bt corn and those who did not by examining the testes of the rats which is
considered a particularly sensitive organ for toxicity tests because of the high
degree of cell divisions and thus high susceptibility to cellular or molecular toxins
(Norris, 2015).
After more than 20 years of monitoring by countries and researchers around the
world, many of the suspicions surrounding the effects of GMOs on organ health, our
offspring, and our DNA have been addressed and tested. According to American
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), "Indeed, the science is quite
clear: crop improvement by the modern molecular techniques of biotechnology is
safe". Additionally, they said that "The World Health Organization, the American
Medical Association, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the British Royal
Society, and every other respected organization that has examined the evidence
has come to the same conclusion: Consuming foods containing ingredients derived
from GM [genetically modified] crops is no riskier than consuming the same foods
containing ingredients from crop plants modified by conventional plant
improvement techniques"( Lallanila, 2016).

The AAAS also said that the stand of most people with regards to GMOs is more on
the emotions rather than the facts (Lallanila, 2016). But still, the doubts of many
people cannot be lifted that easily even if a lot of studies monitoring this kind of
technology are on-going, this is the reason why some of the countries and
companies are endorsing the idea of labelling GMO products in order to let the
consumers decide on their own whether to accept the technology or not. However,
most consumers are not well-informed of the technology and it is easy for them to
believe that the technology is harmful than useful because it is a natural instinct for
humans to shield themselves from something new and they cannot fully grasp,
although GMO is not entirely new but just an advanced level of breeding. Also, this
technology has been proving itself useful through the 30 years it has been used in
the field of agriculture and medicine and with the risk of food security increasing in
the years to come; there is no reason for us to close our minds to this kind of
technology.

Works Cited
Bessen, J. (2015, May 18). OpinionGMO: Its easy as D-N-A! Retrieved April 15,
2017, from Harvard University: The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences:
http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/opinion-gmo-its-easy-as-d-n-a/

Bushak, L. (2015, July 22). A Brief History Of Genetically Modified Organisms: From
Prehistoric Breeding To Modern Biotechnology. Retrieved April 15, 2017, from
Medical Daily: http://www.medicaldaily.com/brief-history-genetically-modified-
organisms-prehistoric-breeding-modern-344076

Lallanilla, M. (2016, January 11). GMOs: Facts About Genetically Modified Food.
Retrieved April 15, 2017, from Live Science: http://www.livescience.com/40895-
gmo-facts.html
Norris, M. L. (2015, August 10). Will GMOs Hurt My Body? The Publics Concerns and
How Scientists Have Addressed Them. Retrieved April 15, 2017, from Harvard
University: The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences:
http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/will-gmos-hurt-my-body/

Rangel, G. (2015, August 9). From Corgis to Corn: A Brief Look at the Long History
of GMO Technology. Retrieved April 15, 2017, from Harvard University: The Graduate
School of Arts and Sciences: http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/from-corgis-to-
corn-a-brief-look-at-the-long-history-of-gmo-technology/

United Nations. (2013, September 18). Solutions for Sustainable Agriculture and
Food Systems.