Check out the new California section
OpinionOpinion L.A.

Stop fretting about GMOs; we have bigger food issues to worry about

AgricultureChemical IndustryFertilizer
Which is scarier? Scientists intentionally inserting genetic material, or blasting plants with radiation?
'Mutation breeding' is a more random way of tweaking the genetic makeup of food
We don't label fertilizers; think of that when you think about Toledo's tainted water supply

The battle against genetically engineered food revolves mostly around the idea that it’s somehow bad for us in some way, though critics of the technology have a lot of trouble producing credible, peer-reviewed research as evidence.

And arguments that most things we eat are genetically modified through selective breeding and other methods fall on deaf ears. Selective breeding is good, people say, which we know because it’s been done for thousands of years. (I’d make an argument, though, about the people who selectively bred the flavor right out of tomatoes, an unexpected side effect of their desire to make the fruit uniformly red.) Besides, they say, it’s natural because we all know that plants can hybridize on their own.

But a new article in the (also new) online publication Vox takes a good stab at that notion by pointing out that there are some ways of modifying food that haven’t been around for hundreds, much less thousands, of years and are anything but natural.

One of these, the Vox article says, is “mutation breeding” or “radiation breeding” -- the use of radiation to induce mutations in plants and see where that takes you. It’s rather random. Scientists don’t really know what they’ll get, but sometimes they get something worth keeping. Actually, a fair amount of the time. As author Brad Plumer put it:

“More than 2,500 varieties of plants bred through mutagenesis have been released since the 1930s -- including rice, wheat, barley, peas, sunflowers, peanuts, grapefruit.”

And some of them are organic.

The public hasn’t shown much anxiety over these foods, Plumer writes, though the National Research Council has said that mutation breeding “has a higher risk of producing unintended effects than genetic engineering does…”

This goes hand-in-hand with all the other strange things we do in food production these days. Pesticides, growth-inducing antibiotics, hormones, artificial fertilizers -- some of these affect our health, others the environment, some both. Think of bodies of water that become choked with toxin-containing algae because of fertilizer runoff from agriculture, and think about the water that Toledo residents weren’t allowed to drink for a couple of days. We don’t label foods for pesticides, fertilizers or these other “conventional” food-production technologies. Only genetically engineered food is considered unconventional; it’s what the big labeling-law movement is all about these days. Why is that? Largely because groups of people have managed to make it an issue, not because it’s the one big dangerous thing happening with our food.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion

Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
AgricultureChemical IndustryFertilizer
  • Base food labeling on fact, not fear
    Base food labeling on fact, not fear

    The scientific evidence on genetically engineered food, which has been around for two decades, indicates that it is as safe for human consumption as any other food. A California bill that would require the labeling of bioengineered food — whose DNA has been modified in the laboratory...

  • Sowing the seeds of an illogical crop ban
    Sowing the seeds of an illogical crop ban

    Last year's half-baked and unsuccessful proposal to ban genetically engineered crops in Los Angeles has not improved with time. Yet here it is before the City Council again, complete with wild statements about bioengineered food, chock full of inconsistent logic and, just like last...

  • Who's staying in that hotel?
    Who's staying in that hotel?

    This week the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to rule on the constitutionality of an L.A. city ordinance that gives police easy access to hotel records and punishes hotel managers who don't hand them over with fines or jail time. The justices should agree with a lower court that the ordinance...

  • Children's Health Insurance Program deserves funding
    Children's Health Insurance Program deserves funding

    In what may be a hopelessly quixotic effort, supporters of the federal Children's Health Insurance Program are trying to persuade Congress to renew its funding almost a year in advance — and in a lame-duck session. Nevertheless, lawmakers ought to heed that call. The program plugs...

  • An Islamic State stalemate
    An Islamic State stalemate

    The United States and its allies are no longer losing the war against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, and in the Middle East, that counts as progress.

  • How big a nuclear arsenal do we really need?
    How big a nuclear arsenal do we really need?

    If President Obama wants to use his last two years to further his agenda, here's something he could do that would both advance the cause of global security and save the country money: suspend plans to develop a new arsenal of American nuclear weapons.

  • Why Pitzer College decided to quit carbon
    Why Pitzer College decided to quit carbon

    Last month, the philanthropic Rockefeller Brothers Fund announced it would sell off the fossil fuel stocks that helped to enrich it. Pitzer College, one of the Claremont Colleges, had beaten the Rockefellers to the punch. Its decision to divest, in April, made it an early adopter in the...

  • Becoming an American: Why citizenship and not residency?
    Becoming an American: Why citizenship and not residency?

    It isn't enough merely to legalize the millions of undocumented residents in this country, The Times' editorial board wrote in the latest installment of its series examining the meaning of citizenship in the U.S. today. Better, it said, would be to set these people on a pathway to...