The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.
A very common question or criticism of GMOs is that they are not properly tested, particularly on humans. . . .
. . . .
. . .“[W]hy don’t we do clinical trials on GMOs the same way we do for drugs?” Drugs are designed to cause a change in the human body. . . Since drugs are altering something in humans, it’s important to know the side-effects. . . and whether or not they’re causing the anticipated effect . . . In contrast, GMOs are designed to be equivalent to their non-GE counterparts. . . GE crops which ARE designed to impact human health, such as vitamin-A enriched rice, should be tested in humans to determine if the desired outcome is achieved. . . .
Another reason why GMOs aren’t tested on humans is that there’s no plausible mechanism for harm.
. . . .
This isn’t a cop-out. If we’re looking for a harmful effect but don’t know what it is because we don’t have a reasonable mechanism whereby harm may occur, how can you design the experiment? What variables will you measure? . . . .
. . . [W]hat is exclusive or unique about GMOs that merits such rigorous testing, yet excludes other crop modification techniques?
Read full, original post: Why aren’t GMOs tested on humans?
