Editing Genetically modified organism (section)

== Controversy ==
{{See also|Genetically modified food controversies}}

There is controversy over GMOs, especially with regard to their release outside laboratory environments. The dispute involves consumers, producers, biotechnology companies, governmental regulators, non-governmental organizations, and scientists. Many of these concerns involve GM crops and whether food produced from them is safe and what impact growing them will have on the environment. These controversies have led to litigation, international trade disputes, and protests, and to restrictive regulation of commercial products in some countries.<ref>{{Cite journal| vauthors = Sheldon IM |date=1 March 2002|title=Regulation of biotechnology: will we ever 'freely' trade GMOs? |journal=European Review of Agricultural Economics|volume=29|issue=1|pages=155–76|citeseerx=10.1.1.596.7670|doi=10.1093/erae/29.1.155 }}</ref> Most concerns are around the health and environmental effects of GMOs. These include whether they may provoke an [[allergic reaction]], whether the transgenes could transfer to human cells, and whether genes not approved for human consumption could [[Outcrossing|outcross]] into the [[food supply]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.who.int/foodsafety/areas_work/food-technology/faq-genetically-modified-food/en/|title=Q&A: genetically modified food|website=World Health Organization|access-date=7 May 2017}}</ref>

[[File:GMO Full Disclosure Advocate.jpg|thumb|upright|A protester advocating for the labeling of GMOs]]

<!--
***********************************************************
* The following language and sources, per [[WP:GMORfC]],  *
* must not be altered without achieving consensus.        *
***********************************************************
-->There is a [[scientific consensus]]<ref name="Nicolia2013" /><ref name="FAO" /><ref name="Ronald2011" /><ref name="Also" /> that currently available food derived from GM crops poses no greater risk to human health than conventional food,<ref name="AAAS2012" /><ref name="ECom2010" /><ref name="AMA2001" /><ref name="LoC2015" /><ref name="NAS2016" /> but that each GM food needs to be tested on a case-by-case basis before introduction.<ref name="WHOFAQ" /><ref name="Haslberger2003" /><ref name="BMA2004" /> Nonetheless, members of the public are much less likely than scientists to perceive GM foods as safe.<ref name="PEW2015" /><ref name="Marris2001" /><ref name="PABE" /><ref name="Scott2016" /> The legal and regulatory status of GM foods varies by country, with some nations banning or restricting them, and others permitting them with widely differing degrees of regulation.<ref name="loc.gov" /><ref name="Bashshur" /><ref name="Sifferlin" /><ref name="Council on Foreign Relations" />
<!--
***********************************************************
*            End of restricted section                    *
***********************************************************
-->

As late as the 1990s [[gene flow]] into wild populations was thought to be unlikely and rare, and if it were to occur, easily eradicated. It was thought that this would add no additional environmental costs or risks – no effects were expected other than those already caused by pesticide applications.<ref name="Field-et-al-1993">{{cite conference | title=The impact of developing herbicide resistant crop plants | last1=Field | first1=R. J. | last2=Conner | first2=A. J. | last3=Foreman | first3=M. H. | editor1-last=Wilson | editor1-first=B. J. | editor2-last=Swarbrick | editor2-first=J. T. | conference=Proceedings I of the 10th Australian Weeds Conference and 14th [[Asian Pacific Weed Science Society]] Conference | location=[[Brisbane, Australia]] | date=6–10 September 1993 | pages=315–318 ref.3 | s2cid=81835152 | url=http://caws.org.nz/old-site/awc/1993/awc199313151.pdf | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190221172444/http://caws.org.nz/old-site/awc/1993/awc199313151.pdf | archive-date=2019-02-21 | url-status=live }} [[CAB Direct (database)|CABD]] [http://www.cabi.org/cabdirect/abstract/20083026795 20083026795]{{Dead link|date=March 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}.</ref> However, in the decades since, several such examples have been observed. Gene flow between GM crops and compatible plants, along with increased use of broad-spectrum [[herbicide]]s,<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Gilbert N | title = Case studies: A hard look at GM crops | journal = Nature | volume = 497 | issue = 7447 | pages = 24–6 | date = May 2013 | pmid = 23636378 | doi = 10.1038/497024a | doi-access =  | bibcode = 2013Natur.497...24G | s2cid = 4417399 }}</ref> can increase the risk of [[Herbicide#Resistance|herbicide resistant]] weed populations.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Schütte G, Eckerstorfer M, Rastelli V, Reichenbecher W, Restrepo-Vassalli S, Ruohonen-Lehto M, Saucy AW, Mertens M | display-authors = 6 | title = Herbicide resistance and biodiversity: agronomic and environmental aspects of genetically modified herbicide-resistant plants | journal = Environmental Sciences Europe | volume = 29 | issue = 1 | pages = 5 | date = 21 January 2017 | pmid = 28163993 | pmc = 5250645 | doi = 10.1186/s12302-016-0100-y | name-list-style = vanc | doi-access = free }}</ref> Debate over the extent and consequences of gene flow intensified in 2001 when a paper was published showing transgenes had been found in [[landrace]] maize in Mexico, the crop's [[Centre of diversity|center of diversity]].<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Dalton R | title = Modified genes spread to local maize | journal = Nature | volume = 456 | issue = 7219 | pages = 149 | date = November 2008 | pmid = 19005518 | doi = 10.1038/456149a | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Agapito-Tenfen S, Lopez FR, Mallah N, Abou-Slemayne G, Trtikova M, Nodari RO, Wickson F | title = Transgene flow in Mexican maize revisited: Socio-biological analysis across two contrasting farmer communities and seed management systems | journal = Ecology and Evolution | volume = 7 | issue = 22 | pages = 9461–9472 | date = November 2017 | pmid = 29187982 | pmc = 5696427 | doi = 10.1002/ece3.3415 | bibcode = 2017EcoEv...7.9461A }}</ref> Gene flow from GM crops to other organisms has been found to generally be lower than what would occur naturally.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Keese P | title = Risks from GMOs due to horizontal gene transfer | journal = Environmental Biosafety Research | volume = 7 | issue = 3 | pages = 123–49 | date = 20 September 2008 | pmid = 18801324 | doi = 10.1051/ebr:2008014 | doi-access = free }}</ref> In order to address some of these concerns some GMOs have been developed with traits to help control their spread. To prevent the genetically modified salmon inadvertently breeding with wild salmon, all the fish raised for food are females, [[triploid]], 99% are reproductively sterile, and raised in areas where escaped salmon could not survive.<!-- <ref name="ReutersNov19" /> --><ref name="USA Today">{{cite news|url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/21/fda-salmon-nature/1784933/|title=FDA: Genetically engineered fish would not harm nature|year=2012|newspaper=USA Today|access-date=28 November 2015}}</ref><ref name="FDAFactsheet">{{cite web|url=https://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/BiotechnologyProductsatCVMAnimalsandAnimalFood/AnimalswithIntentionalGenomicAlterations/ucm473238.htm|title=Animals with Intentional Genomic Alterations – AquAdvantage Salmon Fact Sheet | author = Center for Veterinary Medicine |website=www.fda.gov|access-date=6 February 2019}}</ref> Bacteria have also been modified to depend on nutrients that cannot be found in nature,<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/containing-genetically-modified-bacteria|title=Containing Genetically Modified Bacteria|date=9 November 2015|work=National Institutes of Health (NIH)|access-date=12 September 2018}}</ref> and [[genetic use restriction technology]] has been developed, though not yet marketed, that causes the second generation of GM plants to be sterile.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Lombardo L | title = Genetic use restriction technologies: a review | journal = Plant Biotechnology Journal | volume = 12 | issue = 8 | pages = 995–1005 | date = October 2014 | pmid = 25185773 | doi = 10.1111/pbi.12242 | doi-access = free | bibcode = 2014PBioJ..12..995L }}</ref>

Other environmental and [[agronomic]] concerns include a decrease in biodiversity, an increase in secondary pests (non-targeted pests) and evolution of resistant insect pests.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Carpenter JE | title = Impact of GM crops on biodiversity | journal = GM Crops | volume = 2 | issue = 1 | pages = 7–23 | date = 1 January 2011 | pmid = 21844695 | doi = 10.4161/gmcr.2.1.15086 | bibcode = 2011GMCFB...2....7C | s2cid = 9550338 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Tabashnik BE, Brévault T, Carrière Y | title = Insect resistance to Bt crops: lessons from the first billion acres | journal = Nature Biotechnology | volume = 31 | issue = 6 | pages = 510–21 | date = June 2013 | pmid = 23752438 | doi = 10.1038/nbt.2597 | s2cid = 205278530 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal| vauthors = Qiu J | date=13 May 2010|title=GM crop use makes minor pests major problem |journal=Nature News|doi=10.1038/news.2010.242 |citeseerx=10.1.1.464.7885 }}</ref> In the areas of China and the US with Bt crops the overall biodiversity of insects has increased and the impact of secondary pests has been minimal.<ref name = nas /> Resistance was found to be slow to evolve when best practice strategies were followed.<ref name = nas>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nap.edu/resource/23395/GE-crops-report-brief.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180605075311/https://www.nap.edu/resource/23395/GE-crops-report-brief.pdf |archive-date=2018-06-05 |url-status=live|title=Report in Brief – Genetically Engineered Crops|publisher=National Academy of Sciences|language=en-US|access-date=14 February 2019}}</ref> The impact of Bt crops on beneficial non-target organisms became a public issue after a 1999 paper suggested they could be toxic to [[monarch butterflies]]. Follow up studies have since shown that the toxicity levels encountered in the field were not high enough to harm the larvae.<ref name="Waltz">{{cite journal | vauthors = Waltz E | title = GM crops: Battlefield | journal = Nature | volume = 461 | issue = 7260 | pages = 27–32 | date = September 2009 | pmid = 19727179 | doi = 10.1038/461027a | doi-access = free }}</ref>

Accusations that scientists are "[[Playing God (ethics)|playing God]]" and other [[Religious views on genetically modified foods|religious issues]] have been ascribed to the technology from the beginning.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Dabrock P | title = Playing God? Synthetic biology as a theological and ethical challenge | journal = Systems and Synthetic Biology | volume = 3 | issue = 1–4 | pages = 47–54 | date = December 2009 | pmid = 19816799 | pmc = 2759421 | doi = 10.1007/s11693-009-9028-5 }}</ref> With the ability to genetically engineer humans now possible there are ethical concerns over how far this technology should go, or if it should be used at all.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.pharmaceutical-journal.com/opinion/comment/genetically-engineering-humans-a-step-too-far/20069421.article|title=Genetically engineering humans: a step too far?|vauthors=Sparrow R, Cohen G|date=2015|website=Pharmaceutical Journal|language=en|access-date=14 February 2019|archive-date=6 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200806194838/https://www.pharmaceutical-journal.com/opinion/comment/genetically-engineering-humans-a-step-too-far/20069421.article|url-status=dead}}</ref> Much debate revolves around where the line between treatment and enhancement is and whether the modifications should be inheritable.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/2121264-human-genome-editing-shouldnt-be-used-for-enhancement-yet/|title=Human genome editing shouldn't be used for enhancement – yet| vauthors = Hamzelou J |website=New Scientist|language=en-US|access-date=14 February 2019}}</ref> Other concerns include contamination of the non-genetically modified food supply,<ref name="CIEH">[[Chartered Institute of Environmental Health]] (2006) [http://www.cieh.org/uploadedFiles/Core/Policy/CIEH_consultation_responses/Response_GM_final.pdf "Proposals for managing the coexistence of GM, conventional and organic crops Response to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs consultation paper"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170525043126/http://www.cieh.org/uploadedFiles/Core/Policy/CIEH_consultation_responses/Response_GM_final.pdf |date=25 May 2017 }}. October 2006</ref><ref>{{cite journal|vauthors=Paull J|date=2015|title=GMOs and organic agriculture: Six lessons from Australia|journal=Agriculture & Forestry|volume=61|issue=1|pages=7–14|doi=10.17707/AgricultForest.61.1.01|doi-access=free}}</ref> the rigor of the regulatory process,<ref name="IDEA" /><ref>[[American Medical Association]] (2012). [http://www.ama-assn.org/resources/doc/csaph/a12-csaph2-bioengineeredfoods.pdf "Report 2 of the Council on Science and Public Health: Labeling of Bioengineered Foods"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120907023039/http://www.ama-assn.org/resources/doc/csaph/a12-csaph2-bioengineeredfoods.pdf |date=7 September 2012 }}. "To better detect potential harms of bioengineered foods, the Council believes that pre-market safety assessment should shift from a voluntary notification process to a mandatory requirement." p. 7</ref> consolidation of control of the food supply in companies that make and sell GMOs,<ref name="CAPE" /> exaggeration of the benefits of genetic modification,<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/05/17/478415310/top-scientists-say-gmos-are-safe-but-dont-always-deliver-on-promises|title=GMOs Are Safe, But Don't Always Deliver on Promises, Top Scientists Say|website=NPR.org|language=en|access-date=14 February 2019}}</ref> or concerns over the use of herbicides with [[glyphosate]].<ref>{{cite journal|vauthors=Landrigan PJ, Benbrook C|date=August 2015|title=GMOs, Herbicides, and Public Health|journal=The New England Journal of Medicine|volume=373|issue=8|pages=693–5|doi=10.1056/NEJMp1505660|pmid=26287848|s2cid=241739 |url=http://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8d62/4d2c849c171e2db30876a6efaa8a76907a74.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210213060436/http://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8d62/4d2c849c171e2db30876a6efaa8a76907a74.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-date=13 February 2021}}</ref> Other issues raised include the [[Biological patent|patenting of life]]<ref>{{cite journal|vauthors=Brown C|date=October 2000|title=Patenting life: genetically altered mice an invention, court declares|journal=CMAJ|volume=163|issue=7|pages=867–8|pmc=80518|pmid=11033718}}</ref> and the use of [[intellectual property]] rights.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/the-patent-landscape-of-genetically-modified-organisms/|title=The Patent Landscape of Genetically Modified Organisms|vauthors=Zhou W|date=10 August 2015|work=Science in the News|access-date=5 May 2017|archive-date=9 November 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191109103421/http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/the-patent-landscape-of-genetically-modified-organisms/|url-status=dead}}</ref>

There are large differences in consumer acceptance of GMOs, with Europeans more likely to view GM food negatively than North Americans.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Lucht JM | title = Public Acceptance of Plant Biotechnology and GM Crops | journal = Viruses | volume = 7 | issue = 8 | pages = 4254–81 | date = July 2015 | pmid = 26264020 | pmc = 4576180 | doi = 10.3390/v7082819 | doi-access = free }}</ref> GMOs arrived on the scene as the public confidence in food safety, attributed to recent food scares such as [[Bovine spongiform encephalopathy]] and other scandals involving government regulation of products in Europe, was low.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Stapleton PA |title=From Mad Cows to GMOs: The Side Effects of Modernization |journal=European Journal of Risk Regulation |date=20 January 2017 |volume=7 |issue=3 |pages=517–531 |doi=10.1017/S1867299X0000605X |s2cid=157581205 }}</ref> This along with campaigns run by various [[non-governmental organization]]s (NGO) have been very successful in blocking or limiting the use of GM crops.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Paarlberg R | title = A dubious success: the NGO campaign against GMOs | journal = GM Crops & Food | volume = 5 | issue = 3 | pages = 223–8 | date = July 2014 | pmid = 25437241 | pmc = 5033189 | doi = 10.4161/21645698.2014.952204 }}</ref> NGOs like the [[Organic Consumers Association]], the [[Union of Concerned Scientists]],<ref name="GristBegin">{{cite web|url=http://grist.org/food/the-genetically-modified-food-debate-where-do-we-begin/|title=The genetically modified food debate: Where do we begin?| vauthors = Johnson N |date=8 July 2013|work=Grist }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/collideascape/2014/08/22/gmos-double-standards-union-concerned-scientists/#.VGzlVvnF-rN|title=On Double Standards and the Union of Concerned Scientists|vauthors=Kloor K|date=22 August 2014|work=Discover|name-list-style=vanc|access-date=9 December 2014|archive-date=20 November 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191120030947/http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/collideascape/2014/08/22/gmos-double-standards-union-concerned-scientists/#.VGzlVvnF-rN|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name="Marden">{{cite web|url=http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2236&context=bclr|title=Risk and Regulation: U.S. Regulatory Policy on Genetically Modified Food and Agriculture| vauthors = Marden E |work=44 B.C.L. Rev. 733 (2003).|quote=By the late 1990s, public awareness of GM foods reached a critical level and a number of public interest groups emerged to focus on the issue. One of the early groups to focus on the issue was Mothers for Natural Law ('MFNL'), an Iowa based organization that aimed to ban GM foods from the market.&nbsp;... The Union of Concerned Scientists ('UCS'), an alliance of 50,000 citizens and scientists, has been another prominent voice on the issue.&nbsp;... As the pace of GM products entering the market increased in the 1990s, UCS became a vocal critic of what it saw as the agency's collusion with industry and failure to fully take account of allergenicity and other safety issues.|name-list-style=vanc}}</ref> [[Greenpeace]] and other groups have said that risks have not been adequately identified and managed<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jGD7CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA156 |title=Science, Risk, and Policy| vauthors = Knight AJ |date=14 April 2016|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-317-28081-1|pages=156}}</ref> and that there are unanswered questions regarding the potential long-term impact on human health from food derived from GMOs. They propose mandatory labeling<ref name="BMA">{{cite web|url=http://www.argenbio.org/adc/uploads/pdf/bma.pdf|title=Genetically modified food and health: A second interim statement|date=March 2004|publisher=[[British Medical Association]] Board of Science and Education}}</ref><ref name="PHAA">{{cite web |url=http://www.phaa.net.au/documents/policy/GMFood.pdf |title=Genetically Modified Foods|date=2007|publisher=Public Health Association of Australia|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140120113716/http://www.phaa.net.au/documents/policy/GMFood.pdf|archive-date=20 January 2014}}</ref> or a moratorium on such products.<ref name="CAPE">[[Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment]] (2013) [http://cape.ca/capes-position-statement-on-gmos/ "Statement on Genetically Modified Organisms in the Environment and the Marketplace"]. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140326015525/http://cape.ca/capes-position-statement-on-gmos/|date=26 March 2014}}. October 2013</ref><ref name="IDEA">Irish Doctors' Environmental Association [http://ideaireland.org/library/idea-position-on-genetically-modified-foods/ "IDEA Position on Genetically Modified Foods"]. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140326015714/http://ideaireland.org/library/idea-position-on-genetically-modified-foods/|date=26 March 2014}}. Retrieved 25 March 2014.</ref><ref name="VDC">PR Newswire [http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-releases/genetically-modified-maize-doctors-chamber-warns-of-unpredictable-results-to-humans-231410601.html "Genetically Modified Maize: Doctors' Chamber Warns of 'Unpredictable Results' to Humans"]. 11 November 2013</ref>