scholarly journals Facts and Myths about GM Food—The Case of Poland

Agriculture ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 791
Author(s):  
Paulina Kubisz ◽  
Graham Dalton ◽  
Edward Majewski ◽  
Kinga Pogodzińska
Keyword(s):  
Global Economy ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Negative Attitude ◽  
General Observation ◽  
Adequate Knowledge ◽  
Gm Food ◽  
Polish Society

The importance of biotechnology for the global economy is growing, including developments in the field of genetically modified organisms (GMO), which have revolutionized the cultivation of several major food crops. Despite the many benefits from introducing genetic modifications to crops, the Polish society shows a strong distrust towards GMO-based food. The negative attitude of the society towards genetically modified (GM) food could be considered irrational. It is not supported by adequate knowledge and is based on fears, despite the fact that there is no scientific evidence of threats of GM products towards the environment, health, or human life. Details of these perceptions were revealed within Polish society from surveys of three groups of respondents: consumers, students, farmers. Data from the surveys have been compared with the answers to the same questions by five biotechnology experts from Polish academic institutions. A general observation from the analysis of the survey results and past studies quoted in the literature review is that the level of understanding and acceptance of GMO technologies is still low in Polish society, and, to a large extent, is based on stereotypes rather than on scientific knowledge. They show broad support for the general benefits of GMOs, which does not vary between the three groups of respondents surveyed, but noticeably differs with the experts’ views. GMOs have allies, but also opponents who have their own beliefs shaped largely by unreliable information disseminated through the Internet and social media. Providing more reliable targeted information on GMOs based on scientific evidence can have an important role in changing polarized attitudes towards GM food.

scholarly journals Are science festivals a good place to discuss heated topics?

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (01) ◽  
pp. A07 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sacha Altay ◽  
Camille Lakhlifi
Keyword(s):  
Food Safety ◽  
Small Groups ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Public Acceptance ◽  
The Public ◽  
Positive Shift ◽  
Good Place ◽  
Gm Food ◽  
Controversial Nature

Public acceptance of vaccination and Genetically Modified (GM) food is low and opposition is stiff. During two science festivals in France, we discussed in small groups the scientific evidence and current consensus on the benefits of vaccination and GM food safety. Our interventions reinforced people's positive opinions on vaccination and produced a drastic positive shift of GM food opinions. Despite the controversial nature of the topics discussed, there were very few cases of backfire effects among the 175 participants who volunteered. These results should encourage scientists to engage more often with the public during science festivals, even on heated topics.

scholarly journals THE EUROPEAN UNION, THE UNITED STATES, AND THE GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS (GMOs)

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-20
Author(s):  
Anisa ◽  
Chelsilya ◽  
Grace Yohana ◽  
Mucco Eva ◽  
Morry Zefanya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
The United States ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Technological Advances ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Eu

Current technological advances have been present in all aspects of human life, including technological advances in biotechnology. Biotechnology not only raises hope for science but also raises heated debates among scientists, especially between the European Union and the US. This debate arises because of differences in perspective between the EU and the US. The EU has stringent rules regarding the development efforts of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). At the same time, the US thinks that GMOs are part of agriculture, so there is no need for any special laws to regulate them. Various side effects also come hand in hand with the birth of GMOs. They are ranging from adverse effects on human health, the health of food products, and even environmental damage. The development of GMOs can damage the ecosystem of species that exist in the environment. Still, more complex problems arise due to GMOs like economic problems and monopolies.   Keywords: The  GMOs, The EU, The US.

scholarly journals Consumer perception and preference towards genetically modified (GM) foods: bibliometric evidence and policy imperatives.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Sendhil ◽  
Joan Nyika ◽  
Sheel Yadav ◽  
Joby Mackolil ◽  
Prashat G. Rama Prashat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Food System ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Crop Improvement ◽  
Food Products ◽  
Consumer Perception ◽  
Gm Food ◽  
Gm Foods

Abstract Background: Genetically modified (GM) foods could be a promising option to reduce the dependence of the agri-food system on conventional means of crop improvement. However, the safety of GM food remains a concern, in addition to the perceived and real risks to environment. The opinion about scientific evidence among researchers, policymakers and government regulators on promotion of GM foods for consumers differ. This study presents the trends emerging from research outputs on consumer perception and preference for GM foods and policy prescriptions for enabling the consumption. Scope and Approach: The study mainly focused on (1) exploring the publication trends, geographic focus of research and a comprehensive review on the consumers' perception of and preference to GM foods, (2) identifying research hotspots and emerging genetically modified organisms (GMO) research themes, (3) assessing the integrated nature of GMO research, and (4) suggesting policy prescriptions on challenges and way forward. Bibliometric analyses have been performed using the Web of Science (WOS) database sourcing literature from 1981 to 2021 and analyzed the final sample of 543 publications using BibExcel and VOSviewer visualization software tools. The search strategy utilized the topic basis search of phrases related to GM food preference and perception. Key Findings and Conclusions: The search query retrieving 543 journal articles showed an increasing trend in publications on consumer's response towards GM foods. Thematic analysis revealed a strong interlinkage of GMOs research with 'agriculture' and 'food science technology'. Consumers' positive response is largely influenced by the decision of the governments to ban or approve the GM crops cultivation. Similarly, the public support increases when the potential benefits of the technology are well articulated, consumption increases with a price discount, people's trust on the government and belief in science increases with a positive influence by the media. Mapping of the retrieved articles showed the top four recurrent keywords: GMOs, biotechnology, attitudes and acceptance. Europe and the USA are the first region and country, respectively, in terms of the number of active institutions per research output, per capita GDP publication and citations per article. The National Natural Science Foundation of China, followed by the National University of Malaysia are the top fundraisers for research on GM food consumption, perceptions and attitudes. Although research outputs on GM food consumer's acceptance and preferences are increasing, a majority of publications came from developed nations. Thus, intensive research is yet to be carried out in developing countries to produce a genetically modified food product with superior properties and substantial equivalence with no significant side-effects. We suggest research-, agri-food industries-, and society-oriented policies needed to be implemented by the stakeholders to ensure the safety of GM food products, encourage consumer-based studies, and increase public awareness towards these food products.

scholarly journals Risks and Precautions of Genetically Modified Organisms

ISRN Ecology ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dhan Prakash ◽  
Sonika Verma ◽  
Ranjana Bhatia ◽  
B. N. Tiwary
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Environmental Agreements ◽  
Precautionary Approach ◽  
Biotechnological Approach ◽  
The World ◽  
Controlled Environments ◽  
Potential Risks

Commercial potential of biotechnology is immense since the scope of its activity covers the entire spectrum of human life. The most potent biotechnological approach is the transfer of specifically constructed gene assemblies through various techniques. However, this deliberate modification and the resulting entities thereof have become the bone of contention all over the world. Benefits aside, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have always been considered a threat to environment and human health. In view of this, it has been considered necessary by biosafety regulations of individual countries to test the feasibility of GMOs in contained and controlled environments for any potential risks they may pose. This paper describes the various aspects of risk, its assessment, and management which are imperative in decision making regarding the safe use of GMOs. Efficient efforts are necessary for implementation of regulations. Importance of the risk assessment, management, and precautionary approach in environmental agreements and activism is also discussed.

Islam and Science

2021 ◽  
pp. 205-224
Author(s):  
Mohammad Hashim Kamali
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Divine Revelation ◽  
Basic Premise ◽  
Human Reason ◽  
Meat Eating ◽  
Dietary Restrictions

This chapter explores the basic compatibility or otherwise of Islam with science, especially with reference to stunning and halal slaughtering, halal vaccines, genetically modified organisms, and the environmental impacts of meat eating. It addresses the basic premise of these concepts. Halal and haram are not determined by reference only to human reason or scientific knowledge, but by a combination of these and the guidance mainly of divine revelation (wahy). Worship matters (‘ibadat) are normally determined by the shariah independently of scientific evidence, and this could also be said of a limited number of dietary restrictions Islam has imposed—even though there may be some scientific justification for them. Still, Islam is on the whole receptive to scientific evidence.

scholarly journals Biosafety by definition: an analysis of the New Zealand Environmental Protection Authority’s reasons for not classifying organisms treated with double-stranded RNA as genetically modified or new organisms

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack A Heinemann
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Genetic Material ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Regulatory Oversight ◽  
Rna Molecules ◽  
Key Terms

The New Zealand Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) issued a Decision that makes the use of externally applied double-stranded (ds)RNA molecules on eukaryotic cells or organisms technically out of scope of legislation on new organisms, because in its view the treatment does not create new or genetically modified organisms. dsRNA molecules can be potent gene regulators in eukaryotes, causing what is known as RNA interference. RNA-based technology holds promise for addressing complex and persistent challenges in public health, agriculture and conservation but also raises the threat of unintended consequences. The Decision rests on their conclusion that dsRNA treatments do not modify genes or other genetic material and are therefore not heritable. The EPA conclusion is not consistent with the totality of peer-reviewed research on dsRNA or industry claims. The Decision applies to nearly all eukaryotes, however, the EPA relied upon knowledge of relatively few eukaryotes and its analysis neglected known exceptions. The Decision also has not taken into account the unique eukaryotic biodiversity of the country, much of which is still to be described. The regulator has potentially created precedent-setting definitions of previously undefined or alternatively defined key terms that trigger obligations under binding international agreements, in addition to domestic legislation. Finally, by placing no restriction on the source or means of modifying the dsRNA, the EPA removed regulatory oversight that could prevent the accidental release of viral genes or genomes. This article examines the scientific evidence, conclusions and recommendations of the EPA and also presents some additional options.

scholarly journals Biosafety by definition: an analysis of the New Zealand Environmental Protection Authority’s reasons for not classifying organisms treated with double-stranded RNA as genetically modified or new organisms

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack A Heinemann
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Genetic Material ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Regulatory Oversight ◽  
Rna Molecules ◽  
Key Terms

The New Zealand Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) issued a Decision that makes the use of externally applied double-stranded (ds)RNA molecules on eukaryotic cells or organisms technically out of scope of legislation on new organisms, because in its view the treatment does not create new or genetically modified organisms. dsRNA molecules can be potent gene regulators in eukaryotes, causing what is known as RNA interference. RNA-based technology holds promise for addressing complex and persistent challenges in public health, agriculture and conservation but also raises the threat of unintended consequences. The Decision rests on their conclusion that dsRNA treatments do not modify genes or other genetic material and are therefore not heritable. The EPA conclusion is not consistent with the totality of peer-reviewed research on dsRNA or industry claims. The Decision applies to nearly all eukaryotes, however, the EPA relied upon knowledge of relatively few eukaryotes and its analysis neglected known exceptions. The Decision also has not taken into account the unique eukaryotic biodiversity of the country, much of which is still to be described. The regulator has potentially created precedent-setting definitions of previously undefined or alternatively defined key terms that trigger obligations under binding international agreements, in addition to domestic legislation. Finally, by placing no restriction on the source or means of modifying the dsRNA, the EPA removed regulatory oversight that could prevent the accidental release of viral genes or genomes. This article examines the scientific evidence, conclusions and recommendations of the EPA and also presents some additional options.

Deforming mirrors converting GMOs into smog

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (5) ◽  
pp. 620-627
Author(s):  
Roberto Defez
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
Human Consumption ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Gm Food ◽  
Gm Plants ◽  
The Eu

Purpose The debate around the use and study of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is so complex that frequently people miss that the outcome of some political/social/economic decisions are taken in such a way that the legal/agricultural/medical coherence is lost. The purpose of this text is to underline the contradictions in the European approach to GMOs, when for the past 20 years the European Union (EU) has been using and importing GMOs but rejecting its study or cultivation. Design/methodology/approach The approach follows the distance among public declarations against GMOs from most of the political representatives, followed by decision on our health, nutrition and economic development going exactly in the opposite direction. The arrival of the new genome-edited plants cannot solve all requirements, as in many cases an entire new function should be added and, at present, this will be again a GMO irrespective to the technique used to add a new gene. The delay in taking these decisions are now posing a hazard on the cultural and economic development of the EU. Findings The laws (directives) on GMOs in the EU are far too restrictive and suffer from an over-regulation that prevent any attempt to come to a science-based approach on genetically modified (GM) plants. The basis for the definition and the restrictions is on the technology and not on the final product. However, on the other hand, the GMOs are the only product where the safety analysis is on the final product (which is not the case for organics productions). The paradox is that all restrictions are concentrated on GM plants to be cultivated in Europe, as if the main hazard would be on the environmental impact of local cultivation. Meanwhile, the EU has no concern if the same environmental damage happens abroad and EU is the final user of the technology as 68 different GMOs are imported and used even for human consumption in Europe. Originality/value Fighting against the EU over-regulation would appear to be a position supporting multinational seed companies (none of them based in the EU), described as polluters. The proposed approach is the opposite, asking for a more restrictive regulation to show to the consumers that: most local EU high quality food products are derived from GM-fed animals; GM cotton is potentially far more risky than any GM food; and reducing GM plants cultivated in Europe increases the pesticide sold by chemical companies (mostly based in the EU).

scholarly journals The Chinese public’s awareness and attitudes toward genetically modified foods with different labeling

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yawei Zhao ◽  
Haiyan Deng ◽  
Changxin Yu ◽  
Ruifa Hu
Keyword(s):  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Negative Attitude ◽  
Food Labeling ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
Gm Food ◽  
Gm Foods ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Chinese Public

Abstracts This paper analyzes the awareness and attitudes of the Chinese public toward genetically modified (GM) foods with different types of labeling and evaluates the impact of public confidence in the government management of GM food labeling has on their attitude. From 2015 to 2016, we conducted a series of surveys to collect data from 1730 respondents, which included consumers, farmers, media, and local agricultural officials in agricultural departments. The results show ~60% of the Chinese public do not know that they usually consume or purchase GM products or products containing GM ingredients. Nearly 80% of the Chinese public are accepting foods labeled as not containing GM ingredients, 57% are accepting foods without labeling, and ~40% are accepting GM-labeled foods. The respondents with a lack of confidence in the government are less likely to embrace GM foods. Those that are more aware of GM products are more likely to accept GM labeled foods. The group having the most positive attitude toward GM-labeled foods is the media, followed by agricultural officials, while the group having the most negative attitude toward GM labeled foods is farmers. Our findings provide an empirical basis to inform GM food labeling policy discussions and possible revisions, which may promote the development of GM foods in China.

scholarly journals Are Science Festivals a Good Place to Discuss Heated Topics?

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sacha Altay ◽  
Camille LAKHLIFI
Keyword(s):  
Food Safety ◽  
Small Groups ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Public Acceptance ◽  
The Public ◽  
Positive Shift ◽  
Good Place ◽  
Gm Food ◽  
Controversial Nature

Public acceptance of vaccination and Genetically Modified (GM) food is low and opposition is stiff. During two science festivals in France, we discussed in small groups the scientific evidence and current consensus on the benefits of vaccination and GM food safety. Our interventions reinforced people's positive opinions on vaccination and produced a drastic positive shift of GM food opinions. Despite the controversial nature of the topics discussed, there were very few cases of backfire effects among the 175 participants who volunteered. These results should encourage scientists to engage more often with the public during science festivals, even on heated topics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document