Content
What are GMOS?
The term Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) refers to a living organism that has undergone manipulation of its genes by humans for a specific purpose. Scientifically speaking, genetic modification is much more of a process than a final product. However, the term GMO has recently been embraced as a way of referring to a plant or animal that has had one or more of its genes manipulated or modified in order to benefit humans.
In order to better understand exactly what a GMO is, lets break up this term. Genetically, refers to the genes of a living organism. Every living organism on the planet has genes. The genes in an organism are made of DNA, which are the building blocks of life and determine the specific and unique traits an organism will have, develop and pass down to its offspring. Modified, refers to making a partial or minor change to an organism, typically to improve upon it in a specific and purposeful way. Organisms, for all intents and purposes refer to any living unit of life. This science unit will focus primarily on plant GMOs. Specifically, as it pertains to crop GMOs that humans consume.
Although the term GMO has more recently come into public view within the context of a scientist in a lab tinkering with seeds, cells and DNA, humans have been creating GMOs for centuries. Going back as far as 9,000 years ago ancient farmers were selecting seeds from plants that had the most favorable traits, growing and crossbreeding those plants with seeds from other plants with similar desired traits and disregarding the seeds from plants with unfavorable traits.1 This process is called domestication. This is the process by which a wild organism has been selected and evolved into a more favorable organism through artificial selection. Many of the fruits and vegetables we enjoy today come from plants that were domesticated thousands of years ago. Cereal crops were first domesticated around 9000 BCE in the middle Fertile Crescent in the Middle East.2 Other domesticated produce we currently consume includes strawberries, lettuce, spinach, cabbage, carrots, etc.
Science writer Carl Zimmer discusses this process in his book “She Has Her Mothers Laugh: The Powers, Perversions, and Potential of Heredity”. In this text he describes the domestication of tomatoes by the indigenous farmers of Peru. Zimmer starts by describing how the original wild tomatoes of Peru were the size of blueberries. He then explains that there was a gene in these blueberry-sized tomatoes that was responsible for the size of the tomatoes and that this gene mutated and made bigger tomatoes. Farmers were able to continue to cultivate this gene over years of harvest until we now have the much bigger version of the tomato, which we currently find in our supermarkets. 3
Modern methods of creating GMOs essentially do the same thing at a much more efficient and faster pace. Modern scientists are now able to cut a favorable gene out of one plant and place it into another plant. Thereby, speeding up the domestication method of making GMOs by hundreds, even thousands of years.4
Controversies and Arguments Against GMOs
Harmful to human health
It is widely held in public thought that GMOs have an adverse effect on the human body as well as the animals that provide meat that humans consume. The most pertinent reason for this idea is that many GMO crops have a certain chemical herbicide imbedded in them in order to deter insects from ravaging crops before harvestings. Since 2015 “there has been a sharp increase in the amounts and numbers of chemical herbicides used in GM crops”. This has been found to be true for GMOs worldwide.5 People believe that these herbicides are contributing to the rise of diseases we see in our society. Although there has been much research conducted with the goal of outlining the health risks of GMOs, there is little research that can conclusively assert that GMOs present direct health risks for humans. With this said, a groundbreaking ruling was handed down in San Francisco. In this case a groundskeeper came in direct contact with Monsanto Roundup weed killing herbicide and was subsequently diagnosed with cancer. The San Francisco jury in this case found that Monsanto’s herbicide “was responsible for a former school groundskeeper’s cancer” and awarded the plaintiff $289 million dollars.6 Even though this particular case found that this particular herbicide, which is widely used in GMOs, was responsible for the groundskeeper cancer, there is little data that has found that GMOs are definitely linked to adverse health issues in people that consume them.
Psychological factors
There is also a psychological component regarding the arguments against GMOs. Jamieson et al. argues that people believe that “foods containing unnatural ingredients (GMOs) are produced using unnatural processes” and because of that they are unhealthy, unsafe and undesirable. These authors argue that this skepticism and fear of organisms that are perceived to be unnatural is hardwired into the cognition of humans.7 Examples of this fear can be seen in the many instances in which citizens of communities around the world have organized and protested against GMOs. In 2016 there were 3 separate citizen petitions requesting that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should prohibit the term “natural” on the labels of GMOs.8 This was caused by growing consumer concerns regarding food labels accurately reflecting both ingredients and process.
Patents
Other arguments against GMOs pertain to the fact that some companies are patenting GMOs. Although protecting ones intellectual property is not a new concept, many Americans have a particular problem with the patenting of GMOs. A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a sovereign state or intergovernmental organization to an inventor for a limited period of time in exchange for detailed public disclosure of an invention. Patent laws were designed to protect man made inventions. There hasn’t been much controversy surrounding patents until companies began to patent GMOs. In 1980, a Supreme Court case ruled that bacteria had been genetically modified by the insertion of genes.9 The inserted genes transformed the bacteria from a product of nature to a commodity. This case opened a floodgate of patents sought for genetically modified organisms. The shift that occurred in 1980, allowing a patent on genes, started a monopoly over plants and crops. Allowing patents on living organisms causing a monopoly over certain crops. This monopoly is causing many farmers to lose their livelihood due to patent infringement laws. If a farmer is found to be using patented seeds without having paid for those seeds he can be sued. It can also be difficult for farmers that use organic seeds to compete with farmers that use patented GMO seeds because the latter tends to yield more and require less overhead, allowing those farmers to charge significantly less for their crops.
The ethical debate regarding GMOs is constant, with those opposed using various tools to combat what they see as gross misconduct by companies that are patenting crops. There is an obvious ethical issue here, in that, many don’t believe humans should be able to patent a plant. The ramifications of this means that farmers have to consistently pay companies that own the rights to crops and are sued and face a lifetime of lawsuits when they do not adhere to the patent laws.10
Monsanto is an agricultural industry giant and has an infamous reputation of suing smaller farmers and effectively causing those farmers to go bankrupt and shut down their farms. One of the better-known cases was against Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser. “Schmeiser discovered that his field had been contaminated with Monsanto’s Roundup Ready canola seeds when the land segments surrounding utility poles were sprayed with Roundup. He then admittedly used the seeds from areas where he sprayed with Roundup to replant the following year’s crops”.11 This case went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, which ruled in favor of Monsanto. This is one of many cases in which agricultural companies are able to sue and win cases against small farmers.
Activism
Activists around the world are doing what they can to combat major GMO companies that are patenting crops. Vandana Shivi is one of these activists. As it pertains to GMOs that have herbicides and chemicals like Round-up in them, Vandana believes that “the chemical process reorients agriculture toward toxicity and corporate control instead of working with ecological processes and taking the well-being and health of the entire agro ecosystem”. Thus, Vandana created Navdanya-saving local seed varieties. She has been able to collect seeds from around the world that she believes will produce better quality food with higher yields and return larger profits to farmers. Vandana also argues “instead of recognizing that farmers have been breeders over millennia, giving us the rich agro-biodiversity that is the basis for food security, breeding was reduced to breeding uniform industrial varieties that respond well to chemical inputs”.12 Instead of small farms producing a handful of commodities. Correspondingly, the human diet shifted from having 8,500 plant species to about eight globally traded commodities available. The scientific paradigm was also transformed. Instead of encouraging a holistic approach the practice of agriculture was compartmentalized into fragmented disciplines based on reductionism.
Advantages of having GMOs
Financial Benefits
The use of GMOs in our society has increased exponentially over recent years. For example Glyphosate-tolerant soybean was notably the most cultivated transgenic plant in the world in 2006.13 In the USA 91% of soybean was transgenic in 2007.14 The reason for the proliferation of GMOs in our society is simple. There are many advantages to growing GMOs. One of those advantages comes from the perspective of the farmer. We can reference the example of HT soybean to better understand this. One of the principal advantages of HT soybean for farmers comes from the fact that weeding is simplified. In the past, farmers needed to use multiple herbicides and some weeds were still difficult to control. Transgenic simplifies this process because only a single product is required. In addition, the period when weed treatments can be applied is longer. Furthermore, the herbicides used previously showed instances of being persistent and would negatively affect other crops. This leads to a monetary advantage for farmers as well, because they don’t have to purchase as many pesticides. Farmers using GMOs often see a greater profit margin as it pertains to money spent on pesticides15. In 2014 Klumper found that GMO crops reduced pesticide use by 36.93%, and pesticide costs by 39.15%.16 Furthermore, research conducted by Raney (2006) found several instances in which GMO crops showed distinct financial benefits for farmers. In this study Raney compared the net income of 2 small farmers that used GMO cotton to that of larger scale farmers that did not use GMO cotton. Results showed that the net income of the 2 small farmers using GMOs was twice as much of the net income of the larger scale farmers that did not use GMOs. Raney also noted an estimated 83% economic gain in Mexico, 80% benefit in India, and advantages (i.e., yield, pesticide, income) in KwaZulu Natal by using the same GM cotton variety.17
Yield Benefits
Another benefit GMOs present is the fact that they can increase yield. This is one of the main reasons farmers opt to grow GMOs instead of organic fruits and vegetables.
In 2009, Qaim found a study that found that Bt maize increases gross margins for farmers by 12% in the US, all the way up to 70% in Spain.18 Higher yields mean more profit as farmers have more crops to sell. Consumers can also benefit from the use of GMOs. Often times farmers are able to pass some of the savings on to the consumer.19 This allows the consumer to buy cheaper produce as increases in yield mean a decrease in consumer price. Barrows et al. estimates that use of GM corn resulted in a 13% decrease in prices, while use of GM cotton lowered prices 18% globally. For soybeans, these authors present a range of 265% global price reduction.20 In addition, not only will GMOs allow us to produce more food, they can also allow us to produce healthier food. GM is an example of this as “GM products have been manipulated to increase protein, starch and oil composition, and micronutrient content, thereby making these products more nutritious for consumers”.21
As we better understand how GMOs increase yield and lower production costs, it is important for us to analyze how the use of GMO crops can impact world hunger. Studies show that GMOs can be a critical component to positively impacting world hunger. Similar to corn, soybeans and wheat, rice is an incredibly important crop for many people around the world. It is a “Staple food for more than half the world’s population. More than 3.5 billion people rely on rice for more than 20% of their daily calorie in take”.22 The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that about 815 million people of the 7.6 billion people in the world are suffering from chronic malnourishment.23 Increasing the yield of rice alone by 20 percent will help feed millions of people in impoverished countries. If we were to use GMOs to increase the yields of not only rice, but corn and wheat as well, by up to 20% and find a way to efficiently distribute these crops, we could theoretically support hundreds of millions more people and effectively eradicate world hunger.
We can refer to farmers in Africa to further understand how GMO’s can have a significant impact on crop yield and thus hunger, in impoverished areas. In Africa, “60% of all citizens are still farmers and they are not yet highly productive”.24 This is a major issue for the country as Africa contributes to 6 of the world’s top ten hungriest countries. The proper implementation of GMOs in a continent like Africa will allow civilian farmers to produce higher yields, which in turn will drive down food costs and allow them to feed more people. The question of whether or not to use GMOs can be a difficult question depending on the part of the world you live in. However, if you live in a country that is suffering from severe food shortages you do not necessarily have the luxury of debate. Chances are, you need more food, and you need it now. In these instances the choice to use GMOs can become an easy choice.
Past and Future Implications for GMOs
As we think about the positive potential of GMOs we can also look at historical events regarding famine and see how GMOs could have been helpful. For example, the Irish Potato Famine was a period of mass starvation and disease in Ireland between 1845 and 1849.25 The reason for this starvation is that the vast majority of the potatoes in Ireland, which was their staple crop, were stricken with potato blight, meaning a fungus-like parasite called an oomycete was growing on much of the potatoes making then inedible. As a result one million people died and a million more emigrated from Ireland. Now, it doesn’t take much thought to ponder how many lives could have been saved and how many families could have staved off emigration out of Ireland if the scientists during that time were able to insert their native potato with a gene that would kill the parasite that causes potato blight. If farmers during the Irish Potato Famine had access to genetically modified potatoes that would be immune to potato blight there simply would not have been an Irish Potato Famine. Now extrapolate this example to all the other famines that have happened throughout the world over the course of human history and even consider the potential future famines that could happen particularly because of global warming. It is not difficult to see the vast and amazing potential GMOs can have on our food supply world wide, particularly in places that have the potential to have famine or are prone to droughts.
Environmental Benefits
There are also environmental benefits related to the use of GMOs. The restricted use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides is typically much better for the environment. When fewer of these agents are sprayed on crops the surrounding environment takes on fewer of these agents as well. However, using fewer of these pesticide agents is also linked to a lower yield and higher land use. Thus, farmers use GMOs that inherently contain herbicides to circumvent this problem. Glysophate is the most common herbicide used in GMOs. It is embedded into the GMO crop so that traditional herbicide use is significantly decreased. The low toxicity of glyphosate leads to less herbicide treatments which in turn leads to the environment being exposed to less toxic herbicide.26 Similarly, just as there can be fewer herbicides introduced into the environment as a result of farmers growing GMOs, there can be less herbicide introduced into the human diet as well.
Content Objectives
Students will demonstrate an understanding of the domestication of crops by ancient civilizations. Students will learn the positive and negative outcomes of GMO research, production, and consumption. Students will decide if they support GMOs or not based on what they have learned. Students will create a civil action plan that supports their beliefs.
Non-Content Objectives
Students will be able to take an objective look at an issue and carefully research multiple sides of an argument before they decide which side they agree with. Students will be able to speak publicly and present information they have found. Students will collaborate and create a finished product with a group of their peers.
The content and objectives in this unit are aligned with several NGSS standards.
LS3.A: Inheritance of Traits -Genes are located in the chromosomes of cells, with each chromosome pair containing two variants of each of many distinct genes. Each distinct gene chiefly controls the production of specific proteins, which in turn affects the traits of the individual. Changes (mutations) to genes can result in changes to proteins, which can affect the structures and functions of the organism and thereby change traits.
LS31: Develop and use a model to describe why structural changes to genes (mutations) located on chromosomes may affect proteins and may result in harmful, beneficial, or neutral effects to the structure and function of the organism.
RST.68.1: Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of science and technical texts.
This unit should take roughly 4-5 weeks to complete. However, feel free to extend or shorten the unit as you see fit. The first 2 days of the unit should be devoted to giving students a solid understanding of what GMOs are. This is essentially the introductions to GMOs and it is important that students can demonstrate understanding of this content before you move on to the pros, cons and controversies surrounding GMOs and the projects that will follow. Once you are confident that your students understand the content presented thus far, you will begin teaching them about the benefits of GMOs. Next, you will teach them about the costs associated with GMOs. Then, students will begin working on their individual projects. They will have several projects to choose from. They will have several days to complete each of these projects. After this they will have a class debate. Students will be placed in teams of 2 and will be debating other teams in their class. Students will have a week to prep for the debate. Lastly, students will complete a final group civil action project. Students will be given 1 week to complete this project. This project will conclude the unit. For each project students will have the opportunity to choose which project they would like to complete from a list of several options. Giving students choice will increase engagement as they feel more of a sense of ownership over how they demonstrate what they have learned.
Assessments
Students will be given various forms of formal and informal assessments throughout this unit. The formal assessments will consist of the final projects in the unit. The informal assessments will be teachers’ observations of student participation, work ethic, and group work. In addition teachers will be using rubrics to assess students completion of various projects and presentations. The assessments in this unit will be structured in a way that allows the teacher to record the many ways students demonstrate their understanding of content and learning goals.
Projects/Assignments
Teachers and students will have many assignments and projects to choose from as they use this unit. There will be traditional worksheets and note taking assignments such as making KWL Charts. However, this unit will be written in a way that stresses group and individual projects in order to practice learned content, demonstrate learning, and meet teaching objectives.
Student projects will include:
-A research paper in which students chose and write about a topic pertaining to GMOs.
-A slide show presentation that will connect to their research paper.
-A debate. Students will be placed in pairs in order to have a team debate against other teams in the class. Students will take a stance of being either for or against the consumption, research, and manipulation of GMOs.
-Civil Action Assignment. Students will decide if they are for or against the consumption, research, and manipulation of GMOs and then pick a civil action assignment in order to get involved in this issue. Students will have the option of writing a letter to congress and businesses that sell GMOs, creating a YouTube video that expresses their views or give a presentation to two other classes in the school. Each one of these options will have a rubric in which students can plan and measure their level of completion.
Comments: