FDA Approves GMO Salmon

Just a few days ago, FDA approved the first genetically modified salmon for mass production. The company that is behind this project is AquaBounty Technologies and they approached FDA with this GMO product back in the 1990s. However, this is the first time FDA gave a green light to GMO salmon. Of course, there are a number of rules and regulations that simply has to be followed, but we will take a closer look at those later on.

So, what exactly is genetically modified salmon? It is clear that the researchers have worked on this project for quite some time now and the simplest answer we can give you is that it is a salmon with the advanced growth hormone that makes this fish develop faster. The hormone was taken from the Pacific Chinook salmon. Genetically modified salmon also has another gene from ocean pout that aids the growth hormone, making it stronger and more effective.

FDA took their time with this one and came to a conclusion that genetically modified salmon made by AquaBounty Technologies does not differ from the standard salmon that is caught in the wilderness. The nutritional values are the same and they came to a conclusion that it is not harmful to humans or animals. But there are a couple of restrictions, such as the place where this new salmon is allowed to be grown.
FDA made it clear that the salmon should be raised only in Canada and Panama. It is not allowed to be released in the nature and the growing process should be done in artificial environment, such as large water tanks. This security measure is obligatory in order to prevent the GMO salmon from mixing up with the standard species. FDA will also be keeping a close eye on the factories themselves and will be checking them out quite often.

CEO of AquaBounty Technologies is convinced that this is a watershed moment in food production and claims that it is the best way to deliver healthy and nourishing foods to the consumers without damaging and polluting the environment, especially the ocean wildlife. But on the other hand, the groups who are against GMO have been very vocal about this FDA decision, which is turning out to be quite thought provoking.

A couple of large grocery food chains have already announced that they will not be selling this type of salmon in their stores. That can be a strong blow to AquaBounty Technologies and their long term plans. Also, the environmentalists are concerned about the possible escape of these genetically modified salmons into the wildlife. AquaBounty’s CEO assured them that the escape scenario is quite unlikely, but the critics remain unconvinced. Also the Center for Food Safety will be suing FDA for giving AquaBounty an approval.

This entire ordeal is turning out to be quite messy and even if you are willing to try the genetically modified salmon for yourself, the chances are you won’t be able to find it in your nearest store. The end result is uncertain and this type of salmon might never reach the United States like AquaBounty has planned.
It seems like FDA approval doesn’t mean much to people right now. Yes, the manufacturers can put GMO labels on their products, but doesn’t mean that the consumers will be purchasing them from the stores. Sure, the advancement of biotechnology is evident and we are capable of improving and modifying various organisms, but it is clear that people are not entirely convinced in the safety of these new products. We simply have to wait and see what will eventually happen to AquaBounty’s salmon if and when it reaches the shelves.

Monsanto’s New Anti-Pests Technology

Just a couple of days ago, Monsanto released a press statement saying that they have discovered a way to make plants and crops more resistant to various pests and diseases. Monsanto conducted this research with Harvard University and these two teams worked together on finding out new ways to protect the plants. Their research brought results regarding the pests that have managed to develop a resistance to genetically modified organisms.

The main objective of this collaboration between Monsanto and Harvard University was to find a way to improve the production of proteins in a couple of organisms which then leads to faster regeneration of the tissue and wards off pests and bugs. PACE technology was used and that is the cutting edge innovation when it comes to protein production. As a matter of fact, it is way quicker than anything we have seen so far.

PACE technology is designed to help farmers make the best of the land and the crops they have. This valuable cooperation between these two well-known institutions did create and delivered notable results. PACE helps the plants to produce more protein before the insects can become immune to the existing levels. The members of the teams are hoping that their innovation will be used in the near future by the majority of farmers who are working with GMO seeds and crops.

But what prompted this research? Well, last year Monsanto received a lot of critiques by some of the major environmentalists who accused them of not dealing properly with the superbugs who became a problem and a nuisance to a large number of farmers in the United States. The production of genetically modified corn and soya beans plummeted last year due to the pests that were attacking the crops.

Monsanto responded quickly by putting their best scientists on the project and inviting the Harvard University to help them out with their efforts. Superbugs are simply unacceptable and they had to find a way to deal with them. The production of genetically modified soy beans and corn are the foundation of GM production in the United States and the solution had to be found as soon as possible.

As you probably already know, anything related to Monsanto is a touchy subject that often comes with plenty of criticism. The protesters are usually attacking their poor labeling rules, usage of toxic chemicals for treating their products, and completely ignoring the food safety. USDA announced that they will be reducing the amount of genetically modified corn due to the fact that the majority of crops were destroyed by weeds and pests. They suggested that only licensed farmers would get an opportunity to plant this sort of corn.

However, this latest discovery might change their minds and make them rethink this suggestion because Monsanto did find the way to fight the bugs and pests more efficiently than ever before. The production of corn and soy beans will very likely continue on the same scale as before when it comes to the United States.
It is good to see that the technology related to genetically modified crops is expanding and reaching new levels. No matter how many rallies and protests we have, the production will unlikely subside in the near future. Monsanto is obviously doing their best to correct some of their mistakes and it is positive that they are involving other research teams in order to help them out. This collaboration between Monsanto and Harvard University was clearly a success and the public will be waiting for more test results and the final USDA verdict about the reduction of the planted GMO crops in the United States.

Canola and GM Canola plant

Introduction

Canola refers to a rapeseed and s scientifically referred to as Brassica napus. This is an oilseed plant that is cultivated for the production of high-quality oil that is used in many foods such as Margarine as well as cooking oil. Additionally, it is canola that is used as a seed meal because it contains high quality and quantity of fiber that is left after processing. T is the high protein content that makes Canola cultivated thus promoting its value as a stock feed. Canola plant has been grown in the Southern grain belt regions of Australia since the late 1960s. However, recently in the year 2010 and 2011, over 450 thousand tons of Canola was produced with a gross value of over 300 million US dollars. It is also important to note that Canola possesses beneficial effects on wheat by significant reduction of soil-borne diseases. This only happens when the plant is integrated as part of the crop rotation crops. This is because the wheat that is produced after canola has an increase of yield by over 20 % as compared to planting wheat following wheat.

GM Canola

Two genetically engineered canola varieties have been developed so far in Australia. These include the Roundup Ready canola and InVigor canola. The Roundup canola variety was produced by the Monsanto Company while the InVigor canola variety was introduced by the Bayer CropSciences Company. For purposes of effectiveness, each one of these varieties has been engineered to confer tolerance to specific herbicides. This is under a defined crop management system.
Roundup Ready GM Canola confers tolerance to glyphosate while the InVigor GM canola demonstrates tolerance to herbicide glufosinate. The company trials of growing these plants in the US have shown that GM canola that is produced through a specified crop management system proves to have a superior control over weeds as compared to current plant practices. Additionally, there is evidence that the amount of yield for these genetically engineered canola plants have increased and thus boosting the management savings that is earned from its growth. The herbicides that are utilized in controlling weeds for these crops have been shown to be favorable to the environment as opposed to the herbicides that are used on the traditional/conventional canola that is a bit harsh.

This means that the control of weeds particularly derived from canola Brassicaceae family that are characterized by broad leaves through the application of herbicides during the planting season plays a role in determining the quality and the quantity of the grain that is produced. This is based on the fact that weeds often compete with the canola plant for space and nutrients in the soil as well as other factors such as moisture and sunlight. Because of these reasons, there is a possibility that the yield that is lost due to weed is significant in the canola crop. Additionally, there is increased chance that the cross contamination factors will pose a significant effect on the seeds during harvesting. These factors are taken under control by the growing of GM canola that is resistant to weeds by possessing herbicide resistant genes.

The growth of the GM canola for commercial purposes first took place in 2008 in Victoria and NSW as well as WA in 2010. The most important thing to bear in mind is the fact that Roundup Ready canola is the only GM canola that is available today. Because of this reason, its approval by the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR) has been done. Based on a study that was conducted in Victoria, there was evidence that over 190 farmers in the region planted over 36000 ha of land in 2010 for canola. This paved way for the growth and increase of GM canola that occupied an area of over 15000 ha alone in 2012. There was a high level of yield in the growth of GM canola as demonstrated through the satisfaction that the farmers had. This is because of improved control of weeds as opposed to the conventional varieties of canola.

According to scientists, there is evidence that GM canola express a purpose for processing oils for consumption by humans. This is because the GM canola plant is characterized by ease of growing as well as low price. It has been the efforts of the food companies since the 1970s to try and produce canola that is low in fats to reduce the levels of heart disease-related cases. To achieve this canola was the target plant. However, conventional canola plant has high levels of erucic acid that is poisonous to both animals and human beings. This is because of the high levels of erucic acid that causes lesions in the heart. GM Canola, which has low levels of erucic acid, gave a brilliant alternative while supplementing it with elevated levels of nutrients such as omega six fatty acids beneficial for human porno.

Conclusion
Since the introduction of the genetically engineered canola varieties that are resistant to such components as glyphosate, glufosinate, imidazolinones, as well as bromoxynil, a wide range of benefits, have been realized. These benefits include; a significant rise of GM canola that is resistant to herbicides in the market thus contributing to the rise of market shares by over 70 % in Canada compared to conventional canola. The adoption of this plant that is genetically modified has grown across the globe to regions where it thrives well. This is because of its ease in growing and maintenance on the farm, the decrease in the control of weeds due to its resistance as well as high yield that is realized. This has, in turn, promoted the significant increase in the amount of financial returns as a function of the high yield, decrease in cost of herbicides as well as reduced docking. Despite the difficulty the management of the GM canola varieties, practices such as crop rotation and its widespread adoption have been very much beneficial to the growers of the plant.

USDA Not Inspecting Anti-Browning Mushrooms

Technology that deals with genetic modifications is constantly evolving. We have recently received the news that the new sort of mushrooms that contains edited genes will not be regulated by USDA and will not require their approval in order to be mass produced. You might be wondering why and here is the answer – Yinong Yang, professor of plant pathology at Penn State developed and used a new form of modification that is absolutely harmless.

The technology which was applied is called CRISPR-Cas9 which stands for clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats, and it is a brand new way of genetically modifying the organisms. What makes it so special? Well, the most common way to modify an organism is to introduce the foreign DNA to the genes, whether they come from bacteria or other organisms. CRISPR-Cas9 makes sure that there are no transgenes in the final version of the organism because they target a single genome with a DNA modifying enzyme. The result is a “clean” genetically modified organism.

Yinong Yang worked on a mushroom that doesn’t turn brown as it age. He specifically altered the gene that is in charge of producing that brown color within a mushroom. With eliminating this aging factor in the mushroom, we now have a product that will last longer and be resistant to both ripening and being damaged by mishandling in the supermarkets. Plus, there is no foreign DNA involved.

The decision made by USDA surely did spark a debate among the people who are firmly against genetically modified food, but Yinong Yang is sure that his research is completely safe and that it will revolutionize the agricultural production due to the fact that in theory, CRISPR-Cas9 can be applied to any given crop and it will greatly improve it.

As a matter of fact, CRISPR-Cas9 can make crops stronger and more resistant to various diseases and pests. It can also make them survive droughts, unfavorable conditions, and drive them to utilize the surrounding elements to their advantage. CRISPR-Cas9 can also make crops use nitrogen and phosphorous more efficiently in order to grow.

The development of this new GMO technology can become the future or agriculture. The tests have shown that it is completely benign and it can do wonders for various plants and crops. Therefore, it will be pleasing to both scientist who are working with GMO and those who strongly oppose any sort of modifications.

Yang also hopes that his discovery and usage of CRISPR-Cas9 will finally end the debate whether GMO is safe or not. It most certainly has the potential to be used on a greater scale. However, CRISPR-Cas9 still requires FDA’s approval and it will be submitted for inspection in the near future. FDA needs to take a closer look at all new products and we are sure that they will be fascinated with the safe anti-browning mushrooms just like the rest of us.

FDA needs to put their stamp of approval before any sort of mass production can begin and they will very likely take their time with this one. Even though CRISPR-Cas9 seems to be entirely harmless, there are plenty of tests that needs to be conducted and the never ending debate about the safety of genetically modified foods and products will most certainly continue.

Yang will carry on with his efforts of testing out CRISPR-Cas9 on other plants as well, trying to perfect the small flaws and see if it actually works. We hope that FDA will test Yang’s discovery as soon as possible, reach the verdict quickly, and that the anti-browning mushrooms will hit the shelves in the near future.

First Public Results of GRACE Project

GMO is a fascinating subject and having in mind that it is a fairly recent phenomenon, there are so many researches that are underway at the moment of speaking. GMO managed to divide the scientific community so any breakthrough in the research is a front page news. We are still uncertain about the long-term effect GMO foods can have on human bodies and health. European Union is highly involved in regulating GMO foods. They have commissioned a team of researchers to take a closer look at both medium and long-term effects of GMO products. The team has made the preliminary results available to public in April of 2016 and here is what they found.

The researchers working on GRACE project have a clear goal – getting accurate information on both short term and long term effects of GMO foods on living organisms. Therefore, they began trial testing on rodents who were fed GMO foods. One group was given genetically modified corn for ninety days, and the other one will be consuming the said product for one year. On the other hand, the control group is fed standard and non-genetically modified corn in the same time frame.

The results from the short term test group was published in Archives of Toxicology and it clearly showed that there were absolutely no differences between the two groups of rodents. It means that genetically modified corn has the same effect on an organism as the standard crops. European Union’s food regulators require this type of testing before they can give a green light to genetically modified products, and even though they have the positive results from the ninety days trial, they will be waiting for the one year study before they allow the mass production and distribution of MON810 GM corn.

Following the European Union’s strict rules regarding genetically modified food, the GRACE Project will be releasing all the data they have collected in this study so far on their official web site. It will be accessible to anyone who is interested in this topic and they will not be holding back on any documentation. European Union is very involved in the research of GMO foods and the GRACE Project is not the only study they are working on at the moment. As a matter of fact, the findings from two more studies will be added to GRACE’s results once they are completed.

Projects G-TwYST and GMO90+, which are conducted by a group of French researchers have agreed to share the information, data, materials, and their findings with the scientists that are working on GRACE. This is done in order to help each other reach the accurate results that will have an impact on the future of GMO products in European Union. The things are looking good so far and it seems there should be no concern about the production of MON810 GM corn in Europe.

All in all, the results of the one year trial will be published in Archive of Toxicology once it reaches its end, as well as the collaborative results from the other trials. Until then, the researchers working on GRACE Project are inviting all of you to take a part in the public discussion about their latest findings. As we have previously mentioned, all the documents and findings will be on their website. So it doesn’t matter if you are a scientist who is heavily involved in this field of study or a regular person simply interested in the topic of genetically modified foods – you are free to comment and share your opinion on their findings.

The truth about GM crops

There are great truths that underlie the growth and the consumption of GMO plants and the food that are derived from them. In the major GMO-growing nationalities, there are growing concerns that continue to arise about the impact of the GM plants on the environment as well as social consequences. This is especially the case for the crops that demonstrate tolerance to pesticides as well as resistance to insects. This often happens in the Southern region of America where GM plants are grown for the global production of foods as well as the unique impact it has on biodiversity. Currently, the government in the US has launched an investigation into the results of monopolies in the GM seeds. However, in this article, we will focus on some truths about GM plants concerning pesticides, yields, soil carbon levels, and the threat of GM trees and agrofuels.

The rise in the use of pesticides on GM plants
According to research reports across the globe, there is a significant increase of pesticides that are being used on GM crops. This is because of the development of pesticide resistant weeds that increases the use a cocktail of herbicides applied on GM crops. This is the reason for increased levels of pollution on the environment as well as the impact on the human health. For instance, in the regions of Southern Cone, over 200 million liters of biocides were reported to be applied to soy plants and 350 million liters applied on GM soy.
Additionally, there has been an eruption of a controversial issue in Argentina regarding the effects of glyphosate use on the development of the embryo. The solution that is currently anticipated on the weed resistance is increased use of herbicides as they continue to develop more crops that are genetically engineered to confer tolerance to a wide range of herbicides. The increased planting of GMO plants is making it difficult for people to feed themselves in the future due to the eradication of indigenous.

GMO crops are fashioned to increase yield
Some of the claims that are made by the GM industry are that GM plants reduce pesticide use as opposed to the statements raised in the previous point above. Additionally, it is believed that GM plants increase yield. This means that they have a role to play in handling the situation of climate change. The biotechnology industry is therefore currently taking advantage of the climate change negotiations made by the UN to make sure that GM crops are considered as mitigation to the issues of climate change. However, what we have to realize is that none of the plants that have been developed this far can confer a trait that directs the increase of yield for the plant. Additionally, no existing evidence is in support of the claims that GMO plants possess the ability to metabolize carbon.

GMO plants storage of carbon in soil and reduces fertilizer consumption
There are wide ranges of arguments that are made by biotechnological industries concerning the ability of the GM crops to lessen the loss of carbon from the soil. This is through plowing of land where the crops will be planted. However, tilling of land is a traditional practice that was designed to enhance water and soil conservation. This was developed even before the existence of the genetically engineered crops. It is the introduction and use of herbicides tolerant plants that have undermined the sustainability of the land tillage system. This is due to increase of pesticides used and the compaction of the soil as a result of heavy farm machinery.
Recent research results indicate that no tilling method can sequester more carbon than the conventional methods of plowing. This means that biotechnology industries Holy Grail of nitrogen fixing plants that would significantly lead to a decline in the need for artificial fertilizers are not known yet. This is still a theory that is aimed at reducing the need for burning fossil fuel, and hence, a reduction amounting to greenhouse gas emissions. However, this progress is still in its infancy, and the FAO report (2005) states its technical difficulties.

GM trees stores carbon
Currently, there is evidence that GM trees have the ability to store carbon. However, the risk with this type of plant is the complexity that is associated with it and the fact that they occupy significant habitats. Additionally, these plants are characterized by a wide range of interactions. There is also evidence that demonstrates the possibility of cross contaminations taking place in the fields due to aspects of seed dispersal. Additionally, the issue of transgenic sterility proves to be an aspect that is not an option regarding occurrence. This means that the ability of the GM plants to cross the national borders is one of the factors that threaten federal regulations making them insufficient.
Another claim that is made by scientists and the biotechnology industries is that GM crops are the key to improving fuel production. This is an area of GM plant development that is in progress. This is because over 90 percent of the global GM crops grown is being used as animal feeds and fuel instead of food. Additionally, such crops as genetically engineered Roundup Ready soya contribute to high greenhouse gas emission that could hinder this usage as well as contributing to changes in the climatic patterns.

Conclusion
It is evident from this article that genetically modified crops are promising to offer people with the food for the future. However, there is still need for multinational organizations as well as scientists to disclose all the truths about GM plants. This is because, despite its contribution, there are also dangers that are associated with their usage to humans, animals, and to the environment. This is because they have been attributed to contributing to climate change. This means that farming practices have to change radically to meet the challenges of warming the atmosphere. This is not compromising with feeding the population, protection, and restoration of biodiversity, agrofuels as well as services of the ecosystem. The good news is that with the support that is required from the stakeholders, agroecology has so much more to offer!

GMO and the Impact on the Economy

Have you ever wondered about the general effect eliminating GMO foods in the US would have on the economy and the quality of life in that country? A group of scientists and professors had an idea to take a closer look at the consequences that would arise if all GMO seeds and products were eliminated from the States and reached a startling discovery.

Their results were presented to the fellow scientists at International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research in Italy and have reached the rest of the public a couple of weeks ago. Their goal wasn’t to convince anyone that GMO is either good or bad – they simply took a closer look at the aftermath we might be facing and the effect it would have on the country’s economy.

The researchers conducted a thorough examination of the numbers of GMO crops that were planted and produced in 2014. After double checking their numbers and making sure their data is accurate, they ran it through a calculator that is designed to deliver the results of hypothetical changes in agricultural production and the overall impact on the quality of life among US citizens.

The results should raise a concern because in case of eliminating all GMO crops, the general rate of food production would be majorly decreased. The amount of corn that is produced on a yearly basis would decline for 11%, meaning that in order to get the production to the previous level, more than 100,000 hectares of forest should be turned into pastures and corn fields. That would without a doubt have a huge impact on the environment and the surrounding nature.

Besides the changes in the ecosystem of a given area, the gasses emitted in the process of organic production would damage the entire landscape. The greenhouse gas is a dangerous thing and people who are against cultivating and using GMO crops are usually against the greenhouse effect as well. However, you simply cannot have it both ways. Thanks to GMO crops, the emission of the greenhouse gas is much lower than it was a couple of decades ago or so.

If we completely eliminate GMO foods from production, the prices of food in general would skyrocket. The price of corn alone would go up for 28 percent, which is indeed pretty high. That would influence the prices of other products as well, making food more expensive. The cost of living would most certainly change in the United States that is for sure.

The same team of researchers will be continuing their examination of the same subject but in other areas of the world. The Purdue University will fund this project and they will closely inspect the economy of European Union and the possible changes in the identical conditions. GMO crops are not that widespread in Europe as they are in the United States, but we are sure that the results will be surprising.

After Europe, they will move to the Asian countries where GMO crops are more common. We are very excited to see their findings in the future since any research that involves exploration of the subject of GMO crops is thrilling to all of us interested in that field of study. There are so many trials and tests that are underway right now but they usually focus on the short term and long term effects GMO foods have on living organisms. This is the first study that is dealing with the impact on the economy and the quality of life. We are sure that the international research would give us plenty of interesting results that will make us rethink our perspectives.

GMO Plants as an important strategy to adapting climate-smart changes

One of the greatest worries about increased temperatures is the corn impact it has on Agricultural practices. This is because heat waves are perceived to have an impact on the atmospheric humidity through the creation of a drought condition. In the long-term, this extends into reducing the amount of water that is in the soil, rivers, and lakes among corn water sources. Another under worry about the high temperatures is that relating to the prospects of food crops bidding their natural habitats a good bye. According to expert agronomists, if the temperatures rise beyond a certain threshold, there will be anticipated a decline of yield significantly.

However, climate change is not a good thing as people may want to describe it. This is because of the problems that come along with it apart from the high temperatures that exceed the tolerant limits of various species of crops. The alteration in the normal patterns of the weather has a great impact on the systems of agriculture in certain areas. Similarly, variability in the climatic patterns may lead to draft that gives rise to floods during seasons that would otherwise be dry under normal conditions. This causes dryness during wet seasons and thus affects the crops that have been planted. This leads to the crippling of crops for long periods of time.

One of the ways in which this can be taken care of is through adaptation of the genetically engineered crops species that are tolerant to harsh environmental conditions. This means that GMO plants can be produced so that they can withstand drought, floods, extreme temperatures as well as novel breeds of pests. This serves as a promising area that can help in salvaging the extreme changes in the climatic patterns that hit hard the agriculturally productive regions across the globe. This requires employing biotechnology techniques that will help in promoting the crop adaptation.

GM crops in stress conditions
The effects of the alteration in the weather have been attributed as one of the leading causes of changes in the soil conditions. This often leads to toxic salt levels in the ground that are not favorable for crops. In Australia, a gene has been identified in Wheat to play a central role in marker-assisted breeding has promised to offer great avenues of taking care of the salt concentrations in the soil. This is by conferring salt tolerance traits in the GM crops. Based on a report given by the FAO (2010), there is a possibility that the use of biotechnology based techniques can lead to the salt tolerant crops through genetic engineering. This is after a long period of 10 years of genetic research utilizing transgenic plants to alter the salt tolerance. The value and success of this particular approach are anticipated in the filed experiments that are on-going in Australia. The success of this approach is one of the greatest techniques of GMO drought tolerant crops and thus promoting the climate-smart farming technology.

GMO maize, MON87460 to feed people in droughts
There have been significant efforts put in place by the genetic engineers in converting crops so that they can efficiently use carbon dioxide and water. This means that significant conversion of the metabolism of the plants from carbon 3 to carbon four metabolisms has to occur. The carbon four plants that include maize, as well as sugarcane, have a more efficient way of using their water and carbon dioxide. This means that successful genetic engineering of drought tolerance genes has currently been found impossible because of the major changes that have to be made in the metabolic cycle.

In some parts of Africa, Australia, and Europe, there is evidence of plants growing in the absence of moisture after prolonged periods of droughts. Recently, there has been the release of maize that is tolerant to droughts by Monsanto. The maize is referred to as MON87460, and there is anticipation for the marketing consent release for this batch of corn. It is under conditions that have limited amounts of water that the grain yield for the corn loss was reduced significantly when compared to the conventional maize. However, just like the regular corn, MON87460 maize still suffers from loss of yield especially in conditions where the amount of water is limited. This often has been reported to happen during the stage of flowering and the grainfill period. This is because it is during this time that the yields of maize are greatly influenced by their sensitivity to stress conditions. Because of this, the kernel development is disrupted significantly.

Additionally, the maize grain yield of the MON87460 maize has the potential to reach zero level especially under conditions of severe water deficiency. The most important factor to note is that the information that is available from the Monsanto is not inclusive of the evidence that indeed the GMO maize MON87460 will thrive in conditions of limited water.

Currently, there are researches taking place in France on a wide range of crops that have the ability to withstand inhospitable climatic conditions. This includes research on Grapes that are designed to fight against common environmental viruses as well as the wheat in Australia striving to produce foods that have lower glycemic levels. Additionally, other studies are those focusing on cassavas that are resistant to ceratin viruses and bananas that contain high levels of iron. All these studies strive at ensuring that we have GM plants that are climate smart and can assure the future of food security.

Conclusion
A wide range of miracle GMO plants that are capable of thriving in marginal lands is the focus of most researches today. This is to ensure that there is the development of genetically engineered crops that are tolerant to abiotic stresses that include high salt concentrations, droughts among other factors. However, in as much as these promises are highly manipulative of the common farmers, the results of which are still at the level of mere speculations. If we have successful genetic engineering of pants that will confer drought resistance traits, then it will be a happy future for all the people across the globe. This is because it means sufficient food and thus food security. However, there is still the challenge of making significant alterations to the metabolism of the plant.

Issues associated with GMO plants

Introduction
It is within the mission set for 2017 that genetically modified crops have negative impacts on the ecosystem and the entire biodiversity. However, it is quite sad that most of the multinational organizations such as Monsanto do not have the best interests of humankind at heart. It is important to take note that other bodies such as the FDA ensure that the safety of the GM plants and the foods produced from them are safe for human consumption. This means that the foods that are generated from GMO plants have to possess a high standard of safety equal or greater than that we obtain from plants that are bred using the traditional techniques. However, despite all these efforts that have been put in place by safety bodies, there are still concerns involving GMO plants. These include:

– Contamination of farmlands and natural habitats
Genetically engineered plants have been reported to play a crucial role in threatening contamination of the surrounding farming areas as well as natural plant home. This is the central reason why there is low biodiversity among crops that are bred for food as well as the reason for monoculture. Genetically engineered plants often have the ability to adapt better to the environmental conditions and thus increasing their capacity to outcompete plants that occur naturally. The central mandate is not to contribute to loss but rather offer significant support to guided land and climate analysis to ensure that GMO plants are prevented with buffer zones across fields.

– Seed patenting
The issue of seed patenting of genetically modified plants is a growing problem in research as well as agriculture as a whole. This is because when a given formula is obtained for GMO plants, it is the multinational companies that patent and make this commercial. For example, when the strain of Bacillus thuringiensis cotton was produced, Monsanto patented this, and they had control over 95 % of the cotton marketed in India. This sort of monopoly has contributed to the dramatic increase in the prices of cotton leaving the farmers in debt and thus unsustainability of their livelihoods.

– Cross-contamination
This patenting and commercialization of the GMO plants has been the main reason for cross contamination of seeds and thus this problem is passed on to the farmers by selling those contaminated seeds. This means that if the farmer has the GMO plant in their possession and has not planted it but for some reason their field is contaminated, then the lawsuit will be on those that have the patent. However, in case the farmer steals the GMO crop patented, then they are subject to facing a lawsuit. This means that farmers have to be sensitized on aspects that relate to the cross-contamination of GMO plants. However, the current problem is that the multinational companies that are marketing the seeds ensure that the farmers do not keep the seeds for the following year, and this renders the farmers in debt. This is because they have to constantly increase their yield to afford the seeds for planting. A case study in India reveals that most farmers each year find themselves taking loans to provide the seeds that are sold at exorbitantly high prices.

– Destruction of seeds that once existed
The fact that most of the laws have illegalized farmers having seeds from their companies through the seed patenting and commercialization aspect, there is a significant issue of gradual destruction of the naturally occurring seeds. This is through the competition and cross-contamination of GM plants sold by the multinational companies. This is based on the fact that in case the crops that are of one genetic makeup are subjected to failure in a given agricultural year, then the yield goes down, and the livelihoods of smallholder farmers is threatened.

– Political and economic structures
The issues that I have discussed above concerning the GM plants are often influenced by political and economic problems that are linked to the creation, production and distribution of GM plants. Today, genetically engineered plants have not been very useful to small holder farmers. This is because the pressure that is exerted by biotechnological companies, as well as agribusinesses, is quickly killing the existence of small farms. This is because there is a threat that small farms produce more foods than large farms. Additionally, it is the small farms that have the ability of successfully introducing sustainable practices as opposed to the case of industrial farms. This is the reason why the mission set for 2017 is in support of biotech downscaling. This is geared towards encouraging the production as well as the distribution of a wide range of GMO plants that meets the needs of farmers across different ecosystems.

Conclusion
We require a healthy agricultural system that integrates GM plants, and laws have to be streamlined by the government to regulate the activities that are carried out by biotechnological companies. It is these regulations that serve as the hope hindering monopolies and abuse of farmers that are not to blame for issues of cross contaminations. Additionally, there is a need to alter legislations that are in support of industrial farming. For example, the New Deal made in the 1930s gave rise to a set of programs in the US that guaranteed fair pricing of corn instead of permitting free market pricing. This means that the poor farmers that have labored in the farm for their produce did not have the continually increase their yield to stay out of debt like the case today. This means that the system made sure that there was fairness in the pricing of their crops to encourage small farmers as well as promote biodiversity. If this political and economic structure were to be adopted today, then farmers would be encouraged to increase crop biodiversity. This will prevent farming practices that promote planting of a single strain of GMO plants in a huge truck of land. It is these policies that promise to benefit developing countries that rely on agriculture for the most parts of their economy and livelihoods.

The Importance of GMO Labeling

The products that have been genetically modified are vastly superior, scientists say. They benefit all levels of production and it is clear why they might be more profitable than the others. But of course, there is a certain percentage of consumers that oppose these positive aspects and claim that genetically modified organisms are dangerous to both people and the environment.

If we take a look at the broader picture, it is obvious that the advances in GMO technologies are extremely important and we are learning more and more every day on how to perfect them. But there is still so much we need to learn. However, we are not entirely clear on the issue of GMO food’s long term influence on people. There are plenty of researches we need to conduct and they should be done over a longer time period in order to get the most accurate results. The researchers from University Kebangsaan in Malaysia tackled the issue of GMO labeling in that country since the data that is currently available is simply not enough. Surely, this is an extensive research and the results so far have been partial.

The scientists who are advocating the positive sides of GMO products are certain that the biotechnology used in producing these foods are harmless and that the end result of the effect it has on humans is the same as in the non-GMO foods. However, having in mind the very size of GMO industry and the amount of money involved, not everyone is convinced. Many opponents of GMO technology are entirely sure that the scientists who claim that GMO products are safe for consumption are corrupted. Further research is required and we will not know the final outcome for quite some time.

Consumers should be aware of both positive and negative sides of this argument and be able to decide for themselves whether they want to consume genetically modified foods and products, or not. But until we have concrete proof on the negative effects genetically modified organisms can pose on humans, animals, an environment, it is hard to say that these products are safe or unsafe. But what we can say is that the researchers are doing their best to reach that result and they think that putting labels on GMO products is the best approach we can take at the moment.

GMO labeling might add some extra costs to food production, but the researchers from University Kebangsaan in Malaysia are claiming that it is simply necessary at the given time, especially in that country. Educating the consumers is a must and putting a clear label on a GMO product can prevent the unwanted results in the future. Therefore, Malaysia’s strict labeling law is completely justified.

The safety of the consumers should be the primary goal and given the lack of evidence that will persuade us in either way, the labels should be obligatory. The research team at the Kebangsaan University has done an excellent job so far and they dived deep into all the documentation available from Europe, North America, and Asia. They covered the majority of important points such as regulations and general labeling laws that are enforced in various countries.

The conclusion is obvious – the labeling law in Malaysia is reasonable and can only benefit the consumers. Until we get the results from the long term researches that will finally put an end to the debate about the safety of GMO foods, putting a warning label and letting the consumer make a decision is the best approach we have available at the moment. Surely, we will see more and more advances in the field of biotechnology in the years to come and educating people about them is definitely a must.