GMO's: The Whole Story--My Conclusion (Part 4 of 4)

My Conclusion

            In doing research on genetically modified organisms, it was interesting that each article listed pros and cons.  Many of them even pointed out that the use of GMOs is an ethical one.  Applying natural law theory to the dilemma of GMOs in general has me looking at the pros and cons of each side and using my reason to determine the best course of conduct (CCU, n.d.).  Taking into account all of the facts presented and my reconciliation to my personal ethical dilemmas there are still a few more points to weigh as I make my final decision regarding GMOs.

            The main area still to be addressed is a Biblical one.  Genesis 1:11-12 tells us that on the third day God created plants that would have seed according to their own kinds.  An apple tree would produce apples with seeds inside that would grow an apple tree.  Grasses would produce grass seed of the same kind as the parent plant.  God said that the way he created these plants was good.  Yes, natural hybrids are still possible, but they are like “rearranging the deck chairs on a familiar ship.  ‘In most cases…the genes and their products have been consumed for millennia’…” (Curry, 2013, p. 6), and “they can emerge, even without human’s intervention” (Sandu, 2010, p. 13).  Even with human intervention, hybridizing within the genetic lines that God created seems to be Biblically sound, but going outside of those boundaries can lead to some gray areas (see Deuteronomy 22:9-11 which talks about mixing seed within the same vineyard or plowing with two different kinds of animals).  Even Jacob used genetic diversity when tending Laban’s flocks to breed the specific traits he wanted (Genesis 30).  The worry becomes when humans try to become the creators rather than being the created.

            It is also interesting to see how prevalent biotech crops have become since they were first introduced but that the FDA has not changed their policy regarding GMOs since 1992 (Wohlers, 2013).  It seems to me that it is time for them to revisit their policies and make some updates regarding labeling, how tests are run and by whom, and how GMOs are reviewed.  Even the American Medical Association has asked the FDA “to ‘remain alert to new data’ on health consequences of bioengineered foods and to ‘update its policies accordingly’” (“Should You Worry,” 2013, p. 5).  This becomes especially important as gene stacking becomes more prevalent and each analysis has to be done individually on seeds and plants (Broeders, et al., 2012).  It is also important as GMOs are developed for industrial or pharmaceutical use but are not intended for the food supply as UGM can never be entirely ruled out (Broeders, et al., 2012).

            Weighing all of the above information, I have come to my own conclusion about GMOs.  While I still have a few areas to be worked out, I am glad that I was able to apply ethics to this area and come to my own decision.  As Palmer said, it is too easy to allow specialists, who often have “a political agenda to seize power at moments of social vulnerability,” to give us the answers (2007, p. 54).  “Modern knowledge has allowed us to manipulate the world but not to control its fate…Indeed, by disconnecting us from the world [we have been led] into actions so inharmonious with reality that catastrophe seems inevitable if we stay the course” (Palmer, 2007, p. 57).  It has even been said that future generations will look back on how we are manipulating the very core of life (DNA) and wonder at our audacity (Conrad, 2007).  In 1913, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis “wrote that it is time to know what substances we consume” (Wohlers, 2013, p. 74).  If that was true in 1913, how much more does it apply today?  Ethically it is time for us to evaluate the use of genetically modified organisms and their impact on our food, our health and our environment.

Key Terms
biotech (biotechnology): “the use of living cells, bacteria, etc., to make useful products (such as crops
            that insects are less likely to destroy or new kinds of medicine)” (Biotechnology, 2014).

BT (Bacillus thuringiensis): naturally occurring bacteria which lives in the soil; allowed to be sprayed on organic farms as an insecticide.

genetically engineered (GE): refers to seeds that “have somehow been altered by science in order to produce more positive results such as bigger size, brighter colors, or sweeter flavor” (Barnes, 2005, p. 53).

genetically modified organism (GMO): “the rapid and accurate alteration of genetic material in such a way that does not occur by natural recombination” (Wohlers, 2013, p. 74).  “The technology inserts genetic material from one species into another to give a crop or animal a new quality” (Mather, 2012, p. 1).

organic: “yielding, or involving the use of food produced with the use of feed or fertilizer of plant or animal origin without employment of chemically formulated fertilizers, growth stimulants, antibiotics, or pesticides” (Organic, 2014).

stacked hybrids: “varieties that have been manipulated to express several GM effects at once” (Mather, 2012, p. 3).

substantial equivalence: “’embodies the idea that existing organisms used as foods, or as a source of food, can be used as the basis for comparison when assessing the safety of human consumption of a food or food component that has been modified or is new’ (p. 14)” (Wohlers, 2013, p. 76).

transgenic crops: “being or used to produce an organism or cell of one species into which one or more genes of another species have been incorporated” (Transgenic, 2014).

unauthorized GMO (UGM): genetically modified plants found outside of their designated place.

GMO's: The Whole Story--Opposed (Part 3 of 4)

Opposed

The three scientific concerns regarding GM foods are: “1) environmental hazards; 2) human health risks; and, 3) socioeconomic dangers” (Wohlers, 2013, p. 75).  These mirror the very reasons given in support of crops that have been genetically altered.  Oftentimes these three areas are intertwined and not stand alone issues.

Some of the most common types of GM crops are those containing BT (Bacillus thuringiensis), naturally occurring bacteria that live in the soil which have been genetically added to corn, potatoes, soy, canola and cotton.  The bacteria works by producing spores within the digestive tract of the insect that eats it causing paralysis and death (Conrad, 2007).  This bacterium is on the list of approved insecticides that can be sprayed on organic farms where the toxin in the bacteria is activated when the insect takes a bite of the plant (Conrad, 2007; Curry, 2013).  By inserting the BT genes directly into a plant’s DNA, the plant produces the bacteria itself that kills the insects that could destroy it (Mather, 2012).  The problem with comparing spraying BT on an organic farm and genetically inserting it into a crop is that the effectiveness of a BT spray is short lived.  It can also be washed off.  When the BT has been genetically inserted, it is being consumed, not just by the insects that eat the plant, but by any other organism that eats the plant as well (J. Fedance, personal communication, April 2014).  This becomes a problem when “86 percent of corn, up to 90 percent of all soybeans and nearly 93 percent of cotton” grown in America has been genetically modified (Mather, 2012, p. 2).

There are also Roundup-Ready crops which have been genetically altered to resist glyphosate, the main ingredient in Roundup (which was created by biotech company Monsanto).  These crops include soybeans, corn, canola, sugar beets, cotton, alfalfa and Kentucky bluegrass (Mather, 2012).  According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), glyphosate is one of the most widely used pesticides in the United States (Mather, 2012).  Research on the effects of glyphosate has linked it to birth defects in birds and amphibians and to “cancer, endocrine disruption, damage to DNA and reproductive and developmental damage in mammals” (Mather, 2012, p. 4).  In straw alone there can be enough toxins from the herbicide to make pigs and cattle infertile (Mather, 2012).

These crops which have been genetically altered to already include herbicides and pesticides have not reduced the use of topical treatments on farms.  Instead, because of the use of stacked hybrids (which have more than one genetically altered component), insects are developing resistance to more forms of control causing farmers to have to apply more pesticides instead of less (Mather, 2012).  Weeds can also develop this resistance rendering the herbicides useless (Curry, 2013).  

The idea that genetically engineering plants is just a scientific way of doing what plants naturally do anyway is not entirely accurate.  While humans have been creating hybrids since the beginning of agriculture, they have never introduced outside organisms into the plants.  The hybridization has always been within individual plant species.  Plants eaten for food have never had genes outside of the food supply in them or genes from another species integrated into them (Curry, 2013).  Ecologists point to molecular biologists as having a limited view of how plants grow outside of a laboratory where they are free to crossbreed and limit crop diversity.  “Widespread use of a few varieties of GMO crops might limit genetic diversity and thus the ability to survive in altered form when pests or other hazards unexpectedly arrive” (Curry, 2013, p. 6). 

This causes human health concerns as well.  BT spliced into a plant’s DNA is being consumed by animals and humans (whether through eating the crop or eating the animal that has eaten the crop).  Celiac disease and digestive intolerances are on the rise (J. Fedance, personal communication, April 2014).  Glyphosate causes many problems in mammals, which are also on the rise in humans.  Allergies are on the rise and without knowing which genes have been added to which crop, eating GMOs is not safe for people with food allergies, as is seen in the case where a Brazil nut gene was added to soybeans and people with nut allergies had reactions to the soybeans as well (Wohlers, 2013).  Children are at greatest risk for these exposures because of their immature immune systems and undeveloped bodies (Wohlers, 2013).

Because of the way that genetically engineered seeds are produced, they can be created with a terminator, or suicide, gene that disables successive seeds from being viable.  This means that each year, farmers have to buy new seed (Wohlers, 2013).  This is true, not only for farmers growing GM crops, but also for neighboring farmers whose crops have been cross pollinated with those crops.  This could lead to the inability to save any seed in a variety of crop that has been genetically modified, which has begun happening in countries around the world.  “Once genetically altered plants are set loose…there will be no way to call them back” (Curry, 2013, p. 3).  And if those genetically modified crops happen to cross pollinate with crops on a neighboring organic farm, the farmer can no longer sell his crop at the higher organic price (Curry, 2013).  The instances where GM crops have escaped their field test plots (as well as other times they are found growing where they should not be) are referred to as unauthorized GMO or UGM.  There is not just the risk of cross contamination through pollination, but there are examples where crops planted on former GM crop sites actually become contaminated with the alternate gene through the soil (Broeders et al., 2012).  This happened “not only during the time the plants were setting seeds but also after the fields were taken out of production” (Broeders et al., 2012, p. 2).  Full containment of GM crops is almost impossible.

Buying new seed every year is expensive and small farmers cannot afford it, especially in developing countries where food is already scarce (Wohlers, 2013).  In addition, lawsuits can be (and have been) filed by biotech companies against farmers for saving seeds because it is considered patent infringement.  These seeds could have been produced by “windblown pollen, spilled seed on the farmer’s property, volunteer plants from a neighbor’s property, or in other ways” (Mather, 2012, p. 3).  Also, because seven major biotech companies control most of the world’s seed market (71%), they are able to control the costs of those seeds (Wohlers, 2013).  The price of a bag of Monsanto soybeans increased by 143% in the ten years between 2001 and 2011 (Wohlers, 2013).

In the 13 years since the FDA made labeling of GMOs voluntary, not one company has labeled GE ingredients in their products (Kimbrell, 2014).  There are many reasons that labeling of GMOs is voluntary.  One is that the FDA believes that putting a label on something makes consumers believe there is something wrong with the product (Mather, 2012).  However, labeling a product “organic” or “natural” actually increases sales of those products.  They point to raised food costs because of the new labels, but most manufacturers change their labels roughly every year anyway (Kimbrell, 2014).  More than 60 countries already require labeling (Wohlers, 2013) and “report that costs are far lower than the industry and the FDA claim” (Mather, 2012, p. 7).  This could be because most food manufacturers already have GE labels in order to export food to these countries (Kimbrell, 2014).  With 60 to 80 percent of processed foods containing GM ingredients (Wohlers, 2013), it is clear why the demand for labeling GMOs is bipartisan (93% Democrats, 90% Independents, 89% Republicans) (Kimbrell, 2014) with over one million people asking the FDA to label GM food (Wohlers, 2013).

Key Terms

biotech (biotechnology): “the use of living cells, bacteria, etc., to make useful products (such as crops that insects are less likely to destroy or new kinds of medicine)” (Biotechnology, 2014).

BT (Bacillus thuringiensis): naturally occurring bacteria which lives in the soil; allowed to be sprayed on organic farms as an insecticide.

genetically engineered (GE): refers to seeds that “have somehow been altered by science in order to produce more positive results such as bigger size, brighter colors, or sweeter flavor” (Barnes, 2005, p. 53).

genetically modified organism (GMO): “the rapid and accurate alteration of genetic material in such a way that does not occur by natural recombination” (Wohlers, 2013, p. 74).  “The technology inserts genetic material from one species into another to give a crop or animal a new quality” (Mather, 2012, p. 1).

organic: “yielding, or involving the use of food produced with the use of feed or fertilizer of plant or animal origin without employment of chemically formulated fertilizers, growth stimulants, antibiotics, or pesticides” (Organic, 2014).

stacked hybrids: “varieties that have been manipulated to express several GM effects at once” (Mather, 2012, p. 3).

substantial equivalence: “’embodies the idea that existing organisms used as foods, or as a source of food, can be used as the basis for comparison when assessing the safety of human consumption of a food or food component that has been modified or is new’ (p. 14)” (Wohlers, 2013, p. 76).

transgenic crops: “being or used to produce an organism or cell of one species into which one or more genes of another species have been incorporated” (Transgenic, 2014).

unauthorized GMO (UGM): genetically modified plants found outside of their designated place.

GMO's: The Whole Story--All Those in Favor (Part 2 of 4)

All Those in Favor

There are three main reasons that crops are genetically engineered: 1) to resist pests, 2) to grow more easily in a variety of climates, and 3) to boost nutrients (“Should You Worry,” 2013).  These GE crops could lead to a decrease in pesticide use, help countries experiencing food crisis (especially because of drought), and even increase developing countries’ economies with increased yields (Wohlers, 2013).  They could also help with the rise in population growth, because “the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations estimates that by 2050, the world will need to produce 70% more food” just to keep up (Curry, 2013).  In the United States, crops have been modified “for increased yields rather than nutritional enhancement” (“Should You Worry,” 2013, p. 4), but other countries are looking into crops that also boost nutrients, as well as grow in a more diverse climate range. 

An example of this is Golden Rice, which has a gene that adds beta-carotene to the rice giving it 60% of the daily requirement in one bowl (“Should You Worry,” 2013).  This is especially important as “vitamin A deficiency is responsible for 250,000 to 500,000 cases of blindness in children annually, and contributes to some 2 million deaths from weakened immune systems in Asia and Africa” (“Should You Worry,” 2012, p. 4).

Advocates of transgenic crops point to the fact that humans have been hybridizing plants for years.  They do not see a difference between what happens in nature as plants grow and adapt their features and what they do in the laboratory.  “Modern corn resembles teosinte, its wild ancestor, the way a teacup Chihuahua resembles a gray wolf” (Curry, 2013, p. 6).  “A genome is not a static entity but a dynamic structure continuously refining its gene pool” on its own (Curry, 2013, p. 6). 

The American Medical Association (AMA), the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) all state that there is no proven health risk in consuming GMOs (“Should You Worry,” 2012).  Processing of GM crops (especially corn, soybeans, sugar beets, and canola) “eliminates almost all the modified genes and the proteins they produce” (“Should You Worry,” 2012, p. 4).  Almost all GMO plants undergo some type of processing before reaching grocery store shelves, and most fresh produce (not just organic) is actually not genetically engineered.

Key Terms

biotech (biotechnology): “the use of living cells, bacteria, etc., to make useful products (such as crops that insects are less likely to destroy or new kinds of medicine)” (Biotechnology, 2014).

BT (Bacillus thuringiensis): naturally occurring bacteria which lives in the soil; allowed to be sprayed on organic farms as an insecticide.

genetically engineered (GE): refers to seeds that “have somehow been altered by science in order to produce more positive results such as bigger size, brighter colors, or sweeter flavor” (Barnes, 2005, p. 53).

genetically modified organism (GMO): “the rapid and accurate alteration of genetic material in such a way that does not occur by natural recombination” (Wohlers, 2013, p. 74).  “The technology inserts genetic material from one species into another to give a crop or animal a new quality” (Mather, 2012, p. 1).

organic: “yielding, or involving the use of food produced with the use of feed or fertilizer of plant or animal origin without employment of chemically formulated fertilizers, growth stimulants, antibiotics, or pesticides” (Organic, 2014).

stacked hybrids: “varieties that have been manipulated to express several GM effects at once” (Mather, 2012, p. 3).

substantial equivalence: “’embodies the idea that existing organisms used as foods, or as a source of food, can be used as the basis for comparison when assessing the safety of human consumption of a food or food component that has been modified or is new’ (p. 14)” (Wohlers, 2013, p. 76).

transgenic crops: “being or used to produce an organism or cell of one species into which one or more genes of another species have been incorporated” (Transgenic, 2014).

unauthorized GMO (UGM): genetically modified plants found outside of their designated place.

GMO's: The Whole Story--References

These references are used throughout the four parts of these postings.  I would encourage you to look them up and do some more research for yourself.  Don't just take my word for it.

References

Barnes, L. (2005).  The Petit Appetit Cookbook.  New York, NY: HPBooks.

Biotechnology.  (2014). In Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary.  Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/biotechnology

Broeders, S. R. M., De Keersmaecker, S. C. J., & Roosens, N. H. C. (2012).  How to deal with the upcoming challenges in GMO detection in food and feed.  Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology, 2012.  doi: 10.1155/2012/402418

Colorado Christian University.  (n.d.).  PHL 526.  Professional Ethics.  Retrieved from https://blackboard.ccu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_13162_1%26url%3D

Conrad, R. (2007).  Natural beekeeping.  White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.

Curry, A. (2013).  Seeds of conflict.  Discover, 34(3), 38-46.  Retrieved from Academic Search Premier.

Editorial: Separating fact from fiction in GMO debate.  [Editorial].  (2014, April 11).  Capital Ag Press, 87(15), 6.

Kimbrell, G. (2014, March 14).  The argument in favor of GE food labels.  Capital Ag Press, p. 6.

Mather, R. (2012, April/May).  The threats from genetically modified foods.  Mother Earth News.  Retrieved from http://www.motherearthnews.com/homesteading-and-livestock/genetically-modified-foods-zm0z12amzmat.aspx#axzz2yQ47UEX3

Organic.  (2014). In Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary.  Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/organic

Palmer, P. J. (2007).  The courage to teach.  San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Qaim M. & Kouser S.  (2013, June).  Genetically modified crops and food security. PLoS ONE, 8(6). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064879

Sandu, G. H.  (2010). Biblical bioethics essay concerning genetically modified organisms.  Scientific Papers: Animal Science, D(LIII), 12-14.  Bucharest, Romania: The 39^th International Session of Scientific Communications of the Faculty of Animal Science.  Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

Should you worry about GMOs?  (2013, November).  Tufts University Health & Nutrition Letter 31(9), 4-5.  Retrieved from Academic Search Premier.

Transgenic.  (2014). In Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary.  Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transgenic

Wholers, A. E. (2013, Spring).  Labeling of genetically modified food: Closer to reality in the United States?  Politics and the Life Sciences, 32(1), 73-84.  doi: 10.2990/32_1_73

GMO's:The Whole Story--Past, Present and Future (Part 1 of 4)

I'm not a very political person.  I leave that to Danny. He fills me in on the things he knows will interest me, the things he thinks I should know about, and of course answers the questions I ask.  There are a few topics that I'm willing to debate though.  Not in an unfriendly type debate mind you.  We can still be friends and disagree.  But my passions...well, I can guarantee that I will be voting on those things for sure.  This is what made me realize that there are probably others who are the same as me.  Those of you who have your passions and know about those things inside and out.  And then there are probably those things you don't know much about at all.  GMO's used to be like that for me.  Everything I knew about them Danny or my mom had told me, or I had skimmed an article in The Capital Ag Press (It's a newspaper just for farmers...Side note: Did you know you can buy zebra's?  Not kidding there are two for sale right now!  It's tempting...). 

And then I needed a research topic for an ethics paper.  I wanted it to be something that affected me directly and that I had not already researched.  Yep, I chose GMO's.  So, since all my friends in Oregon are getting ready to vote on Prop 92, I thought I'd share my findings with you.  Don't worry, it doesn't read like a research paper (except for the references), and I'll be breaking it into pieces over the next few days.  I would encourage you not to vote until you read all of it.  I'm not going to tell you how to vote, and like I said before, we can still be friends regardless.  I just believe in making an informed decision.  Feel free to share this with others who may not know the whole story.  I'll be sharing both sides and I've included some key terms as well.  Happy reading (and voting!).

GMO's: The Whole Story

               My mom likes to feed people.  That may be why she married into an Italian family.  Their philosophy regarding food was one she already had—feed them like they haven’t eaten in weeks and may not eat again the rest of this week.  She has had some type of garden regardless of what kind of home we have lived in.  I grew up eating vine ripened tomatoes and apricot jam I had helped can.  Feeding people is one of the things my mom enjoys the most about having a farm.  It was one of the decisions that led her to become a farmer.  She wants to give those in the community access to the same type of food we have enjoyed.  She wants people to know where their food comes from and know that they are not only eating healthy, but they are creating health for the environment as well.  She educates them as they tour the farm, as they harvest the produce, as they eat at the BBQ.  As a result, she has educated me along the way.  While I pick cabbage worms off the broccoli and wonder once again why we do not do something to keep those disgusting bugs off, I am reminded of the impact spraying one crop has on the rest of the garden.  As I watch neighbors plant acres of corn, she tells me why she will not be planting corn this year.  Those neighbors are growing genetically engineered (GE) seed, which can interfere with her organic crop.  She is also worried about her bee hive visiting the nearby farms.  It is at this place when I begin to ethically question genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and their effect on my life.

GMOs Past, Present and Future

The release of genetically modified (GM) food began in 1996 with a tomato.  This tomato had an “’improved shelf-life, processing characteristics, flavor, nutritional properties, and agronomic characteristics’ (p. 53)” (Wohlers, 2013, p. 73).  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversees the entry of all GMOs into the United States’ food supply based on what they deem as “generally recognized as safe (GRAS) substance[s]” (Wohlers, 2013, p. 73).  These substances are based on the idea of substantial equivalence where an organism that is already used as food or a source of food “can be used as the basis of comparison when assessing the safety of human consumption of a food or food component that has been modified or is new (p. 14)” (Wohlers, 2013, p. 76).  The studies determining the safety of GM crops are provided by the biotech companies themselves (Mather, 2012; “Should You Worry,” 2013).  There are very few outside studies done on GM crops as the scientific material needed to conduct the studies is heavily guarded by the biotech companies that own it (Mather, 2012).  When raw study data has been released into the scientific community, mixed results regarding the safety of GMOs have been found (Curry, 2013; Mather, 2012).  

“Transgenic crops have been adopted faster than any technology in the history of agriculture” with a “9,000 percent increase in the space of 15 years” worldwide (Curry, 2013, p. 5).  The United States currently leads the world in biotech crop production with 25 GM crops approved for production grown on 69 million hectares of land (Broeders, De Keersmaecker & Roosens, 2012; Wohlers, 2013).  The European Union, who, even though they have 50 registered GM crops, have only approved two for cultivation (“Separating Fact from Fiction,” 2014).

Although regulations regarding GMOs vary from country to country, there are some issues that are common for all involved.  One of these is that the assessment of any new GMO is done on an individual, case-by-case basis.  During this analysis, countries look at the purpose of the GMO, “namely if it is intended for contained use or for release into the environment” (Broeders et al., 2012, p. 1).  They also consider its purpose—whether it will just be grown or if it will be used for raw or processed food (Broeders et al., 2012).

Currently, GMOs are extending out of plants and into the animal food market with a GM salmon being tested that is full grown in half the time of a non-modified salmon (Wohlers, 2013).  Orange growers in Florida are also testing transgenic orange trees to resist the disease that causes citrus greening and threatens the state’s crop (“Should You Worry,” 2013).  And although most GMOs are currently developed by biotech corporations, by “2015 more than half of the GMO will be developed by research institutions” (Broeders et al., 2012).

Mandatory labeling is also in the future for GMOs with Whole Foods requiring all of their products to be labeled by 2018 (Wohlers, 2013).  Although there is not currently a federal regulation requiring the labeling of food that has been genetically modified, individual states are submitting the decision to voters on a regular basis.  Alaska passed a law in 2005 requiring labeling because of the GM fish that will soon be introduced into the market (Wohlers, 2013).  Labeling is also necessary to prevent unauthorized GMO (UGM) from entering countries with GMO restrictions through feed or food importation (Broeders et al., 2012).

 

Key Terms

biotech (biotechnology): “the use of living cells, bacteria, etc., to make useful products (such as crops that insects are less likely to destroy or new kinds of medicine)” (Biotechnology, 2014).

BT (Bacillus thuringiensis): naturally occurring bacteria which lives in the soil; allowed to be sprayed on organic farms as an insecticide.

genetically engineered (GE): refers to seeds that “have somehow been altered by science in order to produce more positive results such as bigger size, brighter colors, or sweeter flavor” (Barnes, 2005, p. 53).

genetically modified organism (GMO): “the rapid and accurate alteration of genetic material in such a way that does not occur by natural recombination” (Wohlers, 2013, p. 74).  “The technology inserts genetic material from one species into another to give a crop or animal a new quality” (Mather, 2012, p. 1).

organic: “yielding, or involving the use of food produced with the use of feed or fertilizer of plant or animal origin without employment of chemically formulated fertilizers, growth stimulants, antibiotics, or pesticides” (Organic, 2014).

stacked hybrids: “varieties that have been manipulated to express several GM effects at once” (Mather, 2012, p. 3).

substantial equivalence: “’embodies the idea that existing organisms used as foods, or as a source of food, can be used as the basis for comparison when assessing the safety of human consumption of a food or food component that has been modified or is new’ (p. 14)” (Wohlers, 2013, p. 76).

transgenic crops: “being or used to produce an organism or cell of one species into which one or more genes of another species have been incorporated” (Transgenic, 2014).

unauthorized GMO (UGM): genetically modified plants found outside of their designated place.