1. Table of Contents
Abstract.............................................................................................................................................2
1.0 Introduction............................................................................................................................3
2.0 Food genetic modification.............................................................................................................3
2.1 Principles behind food genetic modification..........................................................................4
3.0 Opinions concerning food genetic modification.........................................................................5
3.1 Arguments againstfood genetic modification........................................................................7
3.1.1 Antibiotic resistance.....................................................................................................7
3.1.2 Alteration of natural food nutrient ................................................................................7
3.1.3 Tendency to cause food toxicity ....................................................................................8
3.1.4 Tendency to cause allergic...................................................................................................8
3.1.5 Unawareness amongst consumers.................................................................................8
3.2 Arguments supporting food genetic modification........................................................................9
3.2.1 Increased food availability.............................................................................................9
3.2.2 Improved shelf life of food............................................................................................9
3.2.3 Improved nutritional quality of food..............................................................................9
3.3.4 Biological defence against diseases, stresses, pests, weeds, herbicides..........................10
3.3.5 Improvement of quantity and quality of meat, milk and livestock..................................10
4.0 Opinions of food regulators....................................................................................................10
4.1 Codex stands on genetically modified foods........................................................................11

2. 4.2 CFIA stands on genetically modified food............................................................................11
5.0 Conclusion..................................................................................................................................12
References.......................................................................................................................................12
Abstract
Food availability has been affected by the growing global population and agricultural
yields have been poor due to unfavorable environmental conditions [climate change] and pests.
Genetic engineering has presented a promising solution for increased food production through
the invention of modified seeds [crops] that are resistant to drought and pests. Although
genetically modified food crops have been portrayed as a savior from starvation by a population,
some individuals are of the opinion that genetically modified foods are not to be trusted. Several
harmful attributes have been tagged on genetically modified foods and they include; tendency to
boost antibiotic resistance, alteration of the natural nutritional quality of food, toxic tendency and
allergenic tendency. This paper will elucidate the various public conflicts arising from the use of
genetic engineering in food production.

3. 1.0 Introduction
Food is an important part of human existence. Its consumption provides the body with
the required amount of nutrient and energy it needs to function. Besides the nutritional benefits,
food has desirable taste and flavor characteristics which can be enjoyed when consumed
individually or in combinations. The increasing global population has heightened the demands
for food. According the Food and Agricultural Organization’s (2009) previous projection, food
production has to be increased by 70 percent from 2005/2007 to feed an anticipated population
of 9.1 billion people in 2050. This means that the production of important commodities like
cereals will be increased by almost a billion tons.
A number of food producers are capitalizing on the high food demands by boosting their
production through the use of genetically engineered seeds. Going by the definition of the Union
of Concerned Scientists, genetic engineering is a set of technologies used to change the genetic
makeup of cells, including the transfer of genes within and across species boundaries to produce
improved organisms/crops. Crops, through genetic engineering, have been designed to be pest
and drought resistant (ucsusa.org, 2015). Although genetic modified foods have been applauded
by a number of people on their role in increased agricultural productivity and food supply, some
people believe the consumption of genetically modified foods can be catastrophic.
2.0 Food genetic modification
Genetic modification of food is an age long practice. Farmers, thousands of years ago
crossbred crops by transferring genes from male plants in form of pollen to the female organ of
another (Davis, 2015). They also selected and crossbred meatier and healthier animals to
produce desirable offspring (Uzogara, 2000). The use of biotechnological methods to genetically

4. modify crops began in the 1970’s. Stanley Cohen and Herbert Boyer in the year 1972
discovered the process of cutting and merging DNA1 strands at specific places in sequence
(Davis, 2015). However, this information conflicts with the literature of Uzogara (2000) where
it was stated that genetically engineered food made a first appearance in the 1960’s. An applied
example of genetic engineering in agriculture can be seen in the use of synthetic growth
hormones for cows [recombinant bovine somatotropin] to increase milk production (Uzogara,
2000).
2.1 Principles behind food genetic modification
Before genetic engineering, the traditional plant breeding process was based on the
introduction of a number of genes from a desired gene source into a plant. This method had a
flaw of transferring desirable and undesirable genes into a plant. With the emergence of genetic
engineering, the selection and transfer of specific genes with only desirable characteristics was
made possible (Davis, 2015)
The procedures in seed genetic modification as explained by Biosafety Cleaning-House
(2010) are as follows
 A gene of interest after being identified and isolated from a donor organism is
manipulated into a form that can easily be transferred into the recipient seed.
 The desirable gene(s) and other nucleotide sequences required for functionality of the
selected gene(s) are built in an orderly sequence in a transformation cassette. A promoter
sequence and termination sequence included in the transformation cassette ensures that
the gene is expressed correctly in the recipient organism.
1 Deoxyribonucleic acid isa moleculethatcontains the unique genetic code of an organism

5.  Marker genes can be integrated into the transformation cassette to allow easy
identification or selection of cells which have been successfully introduced
 Transformation cassette is incorporated into larger DNA molecule to be used as vector2
and integrated afterwards into the genome of the recipient organism
Fig 1: Process flow of seed genetic modification (modified from Biosafety Cleaning-House,2010)
3.0 Opinions concerning food genetic modification
Food genetic modification despite its perceived benefits has not been welcomed by every
food consumer. Critics in the European Union countries have labelled genetically modified
foods with names such as “Frankenfood” and “Farmageddon” (Uzogara, 2000) because they
believe genetically modified foods are threats to the world of agriculture, human health and the
environment. The critics are of the opinion that safety, ethical, religious and environmental
2 A vector aids the transfer of transformation cassetteinto recipientorganism
Identification
and issolation
of gene from
donor
organism
Building of
genes in
orderly
sequence into
a cassette
Incorporarting
transformation
cassette into
DNA
molecules
Integration of
cassette into
genome of
recepient seed

6. concerns should be of more priority than improved food quality and production enhanced by
genetic engineering (Uzogara, 2000).
Scientific reasons for the disapproval of genetically modified foods can be drawn from a
literature by Fagan (1996); which explains that the genes introduced to food through genetic
engineering can be duplicated and lead to the formation of new proteins which humans have
never been exposed to in food. These new proteins may produce an adverse effect with an
unknown remedy. The proteins might be either allergenic or toxic. Despite the worries, some
GM supporters are of the opinion that genetic engineering is a beneficial practice. They claim
that food manufacturers are committed to providing safe and wholesome food to the consumers
and will by no means make use of harmful raw materials or ingredients when producing food
(Uzogara, 2000).
Several literatures have pointed out the failures of researchers to provide scientific
evidence to prove that genetically modified foods are harmful (Agbioworld.org, 2001;
Monsanto.com 2002, and Greenfacts.org, 2015). Monsanto3 (2002) mentioned that farmers have
grown biotech crops since 1996 and so far, there have been no credible evidence supporting
modified crop’s harm to humans or animals. Monsanto also based its argument on the fact that
no evidence was found in summarized results from 50 research projects conducted in 2010 on
the safety of genetically modified products. Furthermore, the International Council of Science
has given consensus to transgenic4 crops stating that they are safe for human and animal
consumption (ICSU (2003) cited in Greenfacts.org, 2015).
3 Monsanto is a sustainableagriculturecompany that deals with the production of genetically modified products
4 Transgenic crops aregenetically modified crops i.e. gene incorporation in plantgenome

7. 3.1 Arguments against food genetic modification
Genetically modified food products have been feared for several reasons. Some of which
includes; tendency to cause antibiotic resistance, alteration of natural food nutrient, tendency to
cause food toxicity and tendency to cause allergic reaction. It has also been questioned for
denying people the ability to decide what they choose to consume.
3.1.1 Antibiotic resistance
Most genetically modified foods are made with antibiotic resistance maker genes
(Sustainabletable.org, 2015). Marker genes enable genetic engineers know when genetic
materials have been successfully transferred to a host plant or animal. The use of antibiotic
resistant markers have been criticized for its ability to transfer resistant trait to disease causing
bacteria making them more virulent (Sustainabletable.org, 2015; gmo-compass.org, 2006). It is
feared that resistant traits can be transferred to the bacteria in the human gut and this might boost
their ability to withstand antibiotic treatments (pbs.org, 2001; gmo-compass.org, 2006)
3.1.2 Alteration of natural food nutrient
There are concerns that the genetic modification of food might affect the nutritional
characteristics of food. When new genes are introduced into food plants, there might be
alterations in their natural food production mechanism which can consequently affect their
nutritional content. The nutritional content of genetically modified soybeans [Roundup Ready]
was studied by Lappe et al in 1999 and it was discovered that the modified soybeans had a
reduced level of isoflavones [genistin and daidzin] (Lappe et al., cited in ucbiotech.org, 2012).

8. 3.1.3 Tendency to cause food toxicity
Claims have been made by some studies that genetically modified foods may have
hepatic, pancreatic, renal and reproductive effects on humans although these claims have been
labelled as scientifically meaningless by industries and food regulators (gmeducation.org, 2015).
A scenario of food toxicity from genetic engineering can be drawn from an incidence in 1967,
when a new variety of potato was bred for its high solids content which was desired in the
production of potato chips. It was discovered after two years that modified potato developed a
toxin [solanine] hence it was withdrawn from the market (Uzogara, 2009).
3.1.4 Tendency to cause allergic
Allergens5 can easily be transferred from one food material to another through gene
modification. For example the transfer of protein gene from Brazil nuts to a soy genome might
trigger an allergic reaction if consumed by a person allergic to Brazil nuts. There are also
possibilities of creating new allergens that can cause new allergic reactions if genes and traits are
forcefully combined (sustainable.org, 2015)
3.1.5 Unawareness amongst consumers
There are fears that genetic engineering can manipulate food materials to contain genes
from an undesired food (Uzogara, 2015). For example the transfer of pig genes to grains would
be offensive to Jews and Muslims who mistakenly consume modified grain. Some food
producers fail to label products containing genetically modified ingredients i.e. food producers in
Canada are not mandated by law to label every product containing genetically modified
ingredients (Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN), 2015). This action is an
infringement on the rights of consumers to know and decide what they choose to consume
5 Allergen is a type of antigen that triggers an abnormal immune response in the body

9. 3.2 Arguments supporting food genetic modification
Some individuals have been supportive of food genetic engineering for several reasons.
According to them, genetic engineering has been able to achieve the following; increased food
availability, improved shelf life of food, improved nutritional quality of food and biological
defence against diseases and pests in plants
3.2.1 Increased food availability
One of the reasons for the failure of agriculture and shortage in food supply in many parts
of the world is pest control. However; the emergence of genetic engineering has made it
possible to produce crops that are not only resistant to pest but also resistant to severe weather
such as extreme heat and draught [see appendix B for lists of genetically modified food] (Food
and Agricultural Organization (FAO), 2003). The cultivation of resistant crops will help curb the
problems that result to low food yield and consequently amount to increased availability of food.
3.2.2 Improved shelf life of food
Fruits and vegetables can be manipulated by genetic engineering to last longer. For
example; Flavr Savr tomato has been engineered to have a longer shelf life by delaying its
ripening process (Uzogara, 2000). The application of genetic engineering has helped to avert
massive food wastage and expand trade opportunities (FAO, 2003).
3.2.3 Improved nutritional quality of food
The problems of malnutrition in developing countries have been dealt with through the
help of genetically modified foods. Vitamin A deficiency is a common disease in developing
countries. However, a brand of genetically modified rice known as “Golden Rice” have been
developed to provide the required amount of vitamin A to the body. Considering the fact that

10. rice constitutes one of the three foods [wheat, rice and maize] that provides 50% of the world’s
plant derived energy (International Development Research Centre, no date), the problem of
vitamin A deficiency can be easily resolved by genetically engineered rice Golden Rice.
3.3.4 Biological defence against diseases, stresses, pests, weeds, herbicides
Farmers have benefitted from seeds modified to withstand environmental factors that
limit crop productivity. Genetic engineers have created crops that can withstand droughts, resist
pesticides and herbicides [Roundup ready] (Davis, 2015). Several approaches have been taken
to help plant deal with fungal infections for example; introducing enzymes such as chitinase or
glucanase into a plant can help in the breakdown of chitin and glucan [essential components of
fungal walls] respectively (GMO compass b, 2006).
3.3.5 Improvement of quantity and quality of meat, milk and livestock
The use of genetic engineering has promised a great impact toward improving the
efficiency of agricultural production including livestock and animal agriculture in a timely and
more cost-effective manner. The ever-increasing world population and evolving climate
conditions, highlights the need for such effective means of improving food production. Some of
which include improvement in the specific nutritional composition of milk (nutraceutical
protein) and meat (elevated levels of omega-3 fatty acids in transgenic pigs); enhancing growth
rates and carcass composition; enhanced animal welfare through improved disease resistance;
improving reproductive performance and fecundity; improving hair and fiber reduced
environmental impact. (Wheeler, et al., 2003)
4.0 Opinions of foodregulators

11. 4.1 Codex stands on genetically modified foods
The Codex Alimentarius Commission is an international organization responsible for the
control of global food trade. They are made of other organizations which includes; the World
Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization (Ethical consumer, no date)
The primary purpose of codex is to ensure and promote the safety of foods however; Codex
allows the consumers a responsibility to decide what to consume. Codex provides the principles
and guide lines used in assessing the safety of food derived from recombinant DNA plants and
permits governments and food regulators the privilege to use these guidelines in developing their
regulatory mechanisms. Codex has not reached a consensus on labelling genetically modified
food products hence governments have been allowed to apply their own regulations (Codex
Alimentarius. (c2015).
The attitude of codex towards genetically modified foods have been perceived by Ethical
consumer (no date) as heavily influenced by highly placed industries in the food, agricultural and
pharmaceutical sectors.
4.2 Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) stands on genetically modified food
The production and use of transgenic food materials is not prohibited by the Canadian
food inspection agency however, there are certain procedures to be followed before a
novel/genetically modified food gains approval [see appendix A for the list of procedures]. A set
of guidelines have been developed for the labelling of genetically engineered foods by the CFIA
(2015). These guide lines were drawn from a consensus made from three major consultations
since 1993 that agrees that:
 Genetically engineered food will require mandatory labelling if there is a health or safety
concern, i.e., from allergens or a significant nutrient or compositional change (these

12. decisions will be made by Health Canada), in order to inform consumers of the allergen
or change
 Producers should ensure labelling is understandable, truthful and not misleading,
 Voluntary positive labelling will be permitted on the condition that the claim is not
misleading or deceptive and the claim itself is factual.
 Voluntary negative labelling will be permitted on the condition that the claim is not
misleading or deceptive and the claim itself is factual.

5.0 Conclusion
Genetically modified foods have not been scientifically proven to cause health
complications in humans. Even though several literatures have stated scientific reasons why
genetically modified foods may be harmful, there have been either few or no known documented
case(s) of harmful effects of genetically modified foods to humans. However, the strength of
genetic manipulation should not be underestimated. The long term effect of genetically modified
foods on humans will be an interesting area of research focus.
References
Agbioworld. (2011). Arguments in favour of Genetically-Modified Crops. Retrieved 22
November, 2015, from http://www.agbioworld.org/biotech-info/articles/biotech-
art/in_favor.html

13. Biosafety Cleaning-House (2010). Overview of Biosafety and the Cartagena Protocol of
Biosafety. Retrieved 22 November, 2015, from
https://bch.cbd.int/cpb_art15/training/module1.shtml
Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (2015). Labelling. Retrieved 22 November, 2015, from
http://www.cban.ca/Resources/Topics/Labeling
Canadian Food Inspection Agency. (2015). Labelling of Genetically Engineered Food in
Canada.Retrieved 22 November, 2015, from
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/food/labelling/food-labelling-for-industry/method-of-
production-claims/genetically-engineered-foods/eng/1333373177199/1333373638071
Codex Alimentarius. (c2015). Codex alimentarius international food standards: FAQs :
Questions about specific Codex work. Retrieved 22 November, 2015, from
http://www.codexalimentarius.org/faqs/specific-codex-work/en/
Davis, J. B. (2015). Exploring the Legal Liability of Genetically Modified Organisms and their
Impact on Society (Doctoral dissertation, University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida).
Ethical consumer. (no date). Codex alimentarius. Retrieved 22 November, 2015, from
http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/commentanalysis/factsvgreenwash/codexalimentarius.as
px
Fagan, J. B. (1996). Assessing the safety and nutritional quality of genetically engineered
foods. Draft assessment of genetically engineered organisms in the environment.

14. Food and Agricultural Organization. (2009). Global agriculture towards 2050. Retrieved 22
November, 2015, from
http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/docs/Issues_papers/HLEF2050_Global_Agr
iculture.pdf
Food and Agricultural Organization. (2003). Weighing the GMO arguments. Retrieved 22
November, 2015, from http://www.fao.org/english/newsroom/focus/2003/gmo7.htm
GMeducation. (2015). GM Foods can be toxic or allergenic. Retrieved 22 November, 2015,
from http://www.gmeducation.org/faqs/p149399-gm-foods-can-be-toxic-or-
allergenic.html
GMO-Compassa (2006). Antibiotic resistance genes; A threat?. Retrieved 22 November,
2015, from . http://www.gmo-
compass.org/eng/safety/human_health/46.antibiotic_resistance_genes_threat.html
GMO compass b. (2006). Disease Resistance. Retrieved 22 November, 2015, from
http://www.gmo-
compass.org/eng/agri_biotechnology/breeding_aims/148.disease_resistant_crops.html
Grace. (c2015). Genetic Engineering. Retrieved 22 November, 2015, from
http://www.sustainabletable.org/264/genetic-engineering
Greenfacts. (2015). Genetically Modified Crops. Retrieved 22 November, 2015, from

15. http://www.greenfacts.org/en/gmo/3-genetically-engineered-food/4-food-safety-
labelling.htm
International Development Research Centre, . (no date). Facts and figures on food and
biodiversity.Retrieved 22 November, 2015, from
http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Resources/Publications/Pages/ArticleDetails.aspx?PublicationID=
565
Learn genetics. (c2015). Genetically Modified Foods. Retrieved 22 November, 2015, from
http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/science/gmfoods/
Monsanto. (2002). Commonly asked questions about the food safety of GMOs. Retrieved 22
November, 2015, from http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pages/food-safety.aspx
Pbs. (2001). Should we Grow GM Crops. Retrieved 22 November, 2015, from
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/harvest/exist/yes1.html
Ucbiotech. (2012). Do genetically engineered foods have changes in nutritional
content.Retrieved 22 November, 2015, from http://ucbiotech.org/answer.php?question=30
United Concerned Scientists. (2015). What is genetic engineering . Retrieved 22 November,
2015, from http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/our-failing-food-system/genetic-
engineering/what-is-genetic-engineering.html
Uzogara, S. G. (2000). The impact of genetic modification of human foods in the 21st century: A
review. Biotechnology Advances, 18(3), 179-206.

17. Appendix
Appendix A: Steps in regulating genetically modified foods in Canada
Pre-submission
consultation
Health Canada encourages proponents to consult with the Novel Foods
Section of the Food Directorate in advance of notifying a GM food to Health
Canada for safety assessment. This provides the opportunity for regulatory
process requirements to be clarified and for any specific safety issues to be
raised.
Pre-market
notification
When the product's proponent believes it has sufficient information about the
safety of a GM food to address Health Canada's criteria, a submission is
made to the Novel Foods Section. This office coordinates a full safety
assessment of the product, which involves a rigorous scientific evaluation by
Health Canada scientific evaluators. These criteria are described in Health
Canada's Guidelines for the Safety Assessment of Novel Foods.
Scientific
Assessment
Scientific evaluators, with individual expertise in molecular biology,
toxicology, chemistry, nutritional sciences and microbiology, assess the
following:
 development of the modified organism, including the molecular
biological data that characterizes the genetic change;
 composition of and nutritional information about the GM food
compared to a non-modified counterpart food;
 the potential for production of new toxins in the food
 the potential for causing allergic reactions;

18.  microbiological and chemical safety of the food;
 the potential for any unintended or secondary effects;
 key nutrients and toxicants;
 Major constituents (for example, fats, proteins, carbohydrates) and
minor constituents (for example, minerals and vitamins).
Requests for
additional
information
If Health Canada evaluators find that any of the information provided about a
GM food is insufficient, further documentation is requested from the
proponent of the submission. Health Canada does not give any further
consideration to the submission until all requested material is provided and
deemed to be scientifically valid.
Summary
report of
findings
Once evaluators have completed their assessments, they summarize their
findings and recommendations in a report.
Preparation of
food rulings
proposal
Once the evaluation of the product is completed, a Health Canada Food
Rulings Proposal is prepared. This proposal is reviewed by senior staff
(Directors and Director General) in the Food Directorate to ensure that all
issues have been addressed. Once this has been done, a decision is made
whether or not to approve the product.
Letter of no
objection
If a product has successfully completed the evaluation process, and the other
regulatory approvals such as environmental and feed safety are in place, a
"Letter of No Objection" is sent to the product proponent. This letter

19. indicates that the product can be sold in Canada for the intended uses, as
listed in the submission, and whether there are any restrictions or
requirements associated with the Health Canada decision.
Decision
document on
Health Canada
Web site
A decision document, describing the novel food and summarizing the safety
information used to determine its safety as a food, is posted on the Novel
Foods and Ingredients page of Health Canada's Web site.
Source: Modified from Canadian Food Inspection Agency (2015)
Appendix B: Genetically engineered foods approved by Health Canada
Decision Date
(YY/MM/DD)
Product Proponent
2015/03/20 Arctic® Apple Events GD743 and GS784 Okanagan Specialty Fruits
2014/10/31 Insect Resistant Soy - MON 87751 Monsanto Canada Inc.
2014/09/24 Reduced Lignin Alfalfa KK179 Monsanto Canada Inc. and
Forage Genetics LLC

20. 2014/05/15 Herbicide Tolerant Soybean SYHT0H2 Syngenta Seeds Canada Inc.
Bayer Crop Science Inc.
2014/02/12 Herbicide Tolerant Maize Event VCO-
1981-5
Genective SA
2013/11/26 Cibus Canola Line 5715 (imidazolinone and
sulfonylurea herbicide tolerant)
Cibus US LLC
2013/09/10 Soybean Modified to Increase Yield MON
87712
Monsanto Canada Inc.
2013/06/21 Insect Resistant and Herbicide Tolerant
Maize Event 4114
Pioneer Hi-Bred Canada Inc.
2013/06/07 Herbicide Tolerant Soybean DAS-44406-6 Dow Agrosciences Canada Inc.
2012/10/12 Dicamba Tolerant Soybean MON 87708 Monsanto Canada Inc.
2012/06/20 Double Herbicide Tolerant Soybean Event
FG72
Bayer CropScience Inc.
2011/01/20 Drought Tolerant Corn MON 87460 Monsanto Canada Inc.
2003/01/10 Virus resistant papaya Line 55 Papaya Administrative
Committee
2000/10/02 Insect resistant tomato (Bt tomato line
5345)
Monsanto Canada Inc
1999/05/13 Glyphosate tolerant corn (GA21) Monsanto Canada Inc.
1998/06/08 Imidazolinone Tolerant Corn (Mutation of
AHAS Enzyme)
Pioneer Hi-Bred International
Source: Modified from Canadian Food Inspection Agency (2015)

21. Appendix C: creation of an insect resistant tomato plant

22. Source: Learn genetics. (c2015).