Donetha Groover

STEM Methods
GMOs:US vs Europe

There's almost no food that isn't genetically modified. Genetic

modification is the basis of all evolution. Things change because our
planet is subjected to a lot of radiation, which causes DNA damage, which
gets repaired, but results in mutations, which create a ready mixture of
plants that people can choose from to improve agriculture.
Nina Fedoroff molecular biologist
It is true that humans have been tampering with plants since it occurred to us that
we could control their growth. Corn for instance does not look anything like it
once did. That is thanks to humans helping it along. However, GMOs are
different. Although humans did help along corn, the mechanism for reproduction
was still natural. Whereas, with GMOs reproduction is done in a lab, introducing
new, foreign genes that a plant could not incorporate naturally (Papademetriou,
2014). GMOs are a hot topic on both sides of the Atlantic. How they have been
dealt with is extremely different depending on what side of the pond you live on.
Regulation and laws concerning GMOs are much stricter in Europe than the
United States. That is really interesting considering the fact that the United
States is stricter in other areas in regard to health. Many medicines and
treatments get the pass in Europe, while in the United States they are either
heavily regulated or outright not allowed.
For example, following the Federal Drug Act amendments of 1962, the
American Food and Drug Administration (FDA) became considerably
slower to approve new drugs than its counterparts in Germany and Britain;
the result was a substantial cross-Atlantic "drug lag," with new drugs
typically approved years earlier in Europe than the US. (Lynch, 2001)

There are various reasons that there is such a discrepancy between the two
parts of the world. In the journal article Differing U.S. and European Perspectives
on GMOs a lot of the discrepancy comes from the fact that, thanks to Hitler and
his scientific experimentation, Europeans are wary of genetic enhancements. On
the other hand North America, the United States especially, sees scientific
advances of all kinds as a good thing, especially when it involves food.
Europeans were already suspicious of these genetic enhancements when Mad
Cow Disease broke out. The government's handling of the situation deepened
the rift between the people and the government in the scientific realm. This led
to the people demanding more oversight in the realm of food products (Runge,
2002).
In the United States the commercial possibilities outweighed the usual caution
that the government showed. Regulations were eased and notifications were
made easier. This has led to GMO crops accounting for over 40% of the total
crops grown. Some, such as corn, cotton, and soybeans, are 90% or more GMO
crops. There are three different agencies responsible for overseeing various
parts of the GMO crop process in the US. APHIS (Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service) oversees the planting and transporting of the crops. FDA
(Food and Drug Administration) is in charge of overseeing all food, food
additives, animals, drugs, and biological products. Lastly is the EPA
(Environmental Protection Agency). They regulate pesticides and
microorganisms (Acosta, 2014).

All three of these agencies monitor GMOs, and all three have found them to
be safe.
The situation is significantly different in the United States, where the
substantial equivalence principle prevails. According to this principle,
when a new product contains similar quantities of basic components as a
product already existing on the market, the products are considered
substantially equivalent. Consequently, when genetically modified
products are considered as substantially equivalent to non-genetically
modified products by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or the
US Department of Agriculture (USDA), new GMOs do not require any
further test from regulatory agencies when entering the US market.(Lynch
2001)
Therefore there are no bans or restrictions on the use of GMOs. Crops, animals,
or whatever that have used the GMO just need to pass the same safety
inspections as those products that do not contain the alteration. In fact labeling
is required only where there has been a significant alteration of product attributes
(e.g., nutritional quality) or there is a health risk such as allergenicity(Anderson,
2003). Some states have passed labeling laws, some states tried to pass laws
and failed. The federal government is looking into making legislation that would
make it so that individual states cannot pass these types of laws (Meeus, 2016).
GMO use in the European Union is significantly different. EFSA (European
Food and Safety Authority) is in charge of conducting risk assessments. These
findings then go to the European Commission, who can grant authorization to
use or import the GMO product. The European Parliament also can pass laws
and regulations concerning the use of GMOs in their member countries. Member
countries can decide to use or further restrict a GMO that has been approved. A
few countries have went ahead and completely banned all GMOs within their
borders.

Since 2001 the EU has apparently had a moratorium on any new approvals
that was kept undisclosed. In fact it was a lawsuit about maize 1507 that brought
the moratorium into the light. This product had been waiting for approval since
2001, and was denied finally in 2014 (Papademetriou, 2014).
What does this all mean, and how do people feel about it? Regulations in the
United States and Canada are much more lax than those of countries in the
European Union. Public opinion fell along those lines until recently. In the United
States, there is now more of a push for regulations, namely labeling of GMO
products. The reverse is true in the European Union. As more research has
come out and time has passed the people, especially farmers, are wishing for an
ease on regulations. Not a repeal since they do much better not having to
compete with imports from North America, but just a lifting of regulations to allow
for some of the cost saving measures that GMO crops can bring (Anderson,
2003).

References

Acosta, L. (2014, March). Restrictions on Genetically Modified Organisms:

United States | Law Library of Congress. Retrieved from
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/restrictions-on-gmos/usa.php
Anderson, K., & Jackson, L. A. (2003). Why are US and EU policies toward
GMOs so different? Journal of Agrobiotechnology Management and
Economics, 6(3), 95-100. Retrieved from http://www.agbioforum.org
Lynch, D., & Vogel, D. (2001, April 5). The Regulation of GMOs in Europe and
the United States: A Case-Study of Contemporary European Regulatory
Politics - Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved from
http://www.cfr.org/agricultural-policy/regulation-gmos-europe-united-statescase-study-contemporary-european-regulatory-politics/p8688
Meeus, M. (2016). A Tale of Two Continents: GMO Regulations in the United
States and the European Union. Berkley Journal of InternationalLaw.
Retrieved from http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/bjil/
Papademetriou, T. (2014, March). Restrictions on Genetically Modified
Organisms: European Union | Law Library of Congress. Retrieved from
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/restrictions-on-gmos/eu.php
Runge, C. F., Bagnara, G. L., & Jackson, L. A. (2002). Differing U.S. and
European Perspectives on GMOs. Economic Studies on Food, Agriculture,
and the Environment, 3-13. doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-0609-6_1