I have chosen to write all four opinion pieces for The Conversation. I think both topics suit The Conversations platform and I like the style of their opinion pieces the most. It’s not too formal and has a broad range of topics and opinions which I think gives more flexibility in choosing a topic and a writing style.I also think my GM food pieces could suit Huffington Post, they have a similar style of writing in their articles and GM food is a topic they’ve touched on before.
Animal testing is still essential.
Source: Clinton Veterinary HospitalAnimal testing is a controversial topic to say the least. Organisations such as PETA have spent almost 40 years trying to end animal testing in laboratories. What they fail to acknowledge is that not only have they personally benefited from animal testing but so have their pets. It’s a heated topic with strong opinions, for good reasons. People have empathy for animals and don’t want them to suffer. Scientists feel the same way. They’re not cruel inhumane people in any way but they are aware of how many lives they can save with the advancements in medicine that animal testing can help provide.
Animal testing does save livesAlmost every disease treatment, vaccine, drug, and medical tool has relied on animal testing. Cancer treatments, insulin for diabetics and antidepressants, wouldn’t exist without animal testing. In fact, there are laws that require drugs to be tested on two different species before being tested on humans. The advancements in medical treatments has increased life expectancy all around the world. Global life expectancy has more than doubled since 1900 and life expectancy in Australia is now over 80 years for both males and females.
Figure 1: Life expectancy (years) at birth by sex, 1881-1890 to 2013-2015Source: Australian Government, Australian institute of health and welfare.
1041400141668500Infant mortality rates in Australia have dropped from over 70 deaths per 1000 births in 1915 to 3.2 deaths per 1000 births in 2015. That is over 90% less infant deaths compared to 100 years ago. In 1917 Australia started producing its own smallpox vaccine and following that, a long list of vaccines became available to the public. Vaccines for diphtheria, polio, measles, rubella, mumps, hepatitis A and B and many more became available over the years, helping to reduce infant death rates and increase life expectancy
Figure 2: Infant mortality rates 1915-2015Source: Australian bureau of statisticsFor the love of your petHumans aren’t the only ones to benefit from animal testing either. Although it might sound counterproductive, animal testing in laboratories has also helped the veterinary industry. Treatments for cancer, cataracts and diabetes in pets have relied on the same treatments used in humans. The development of those treatments relied on animal testing. If you have a dog, you know how many vaccines they need to protect them against diseases, so the chances are high that your fur baby has benefited from animal testing along with you.
But what about alternatives?While there is research into alternatives, for now the best way to conduct certain research is on animals. The reason for this is because of how complex the human body is. We cannot create a complete living system in a lab and therefore, sometimes our only option is to test on animals. Mice share over 90% of their genes with humans and are the most commonly used in animal testing. Computer models and cell cultures can reduce the number of animals used in laboratory tests but they are not a comprehensive substitute. More research is needed into developing better alternatives before we can end animal testing altogether.
The animals are protectedThere are laws and regulations in place to help protect laboratory animals and to minimise pain and suffering during testing. The Australian code of practice for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes sets out guidelines regarding animal testing in Australia. Animals are only used in laboratory tests when there are no other alternatives to provide an answer. They’re not used in every possible scenario for the sake of it. All other options and alternatives will be used before animal testing is considered. Scientists aren’t evil, they don’t do it for fun. It’s what needs to be done to save lives and it’s done in the most humane way possible following the guidelines put in place.
Can we change perceptions?Negative messages about animal testing are often easier to find than positive ones. It’s hard to explain clearly how important it is without sounding unempathetic towards the animals involved. I think with a better understanding of the policies in place to protect the animals and clearer messaging about their ethical treatment, negativity surrounding the topic may decline. Clear communication about the necessity of animal testing, the benefits and most importantly, the ethical treatment of the animals involved, is needed to reduce public outrage. People want to know that animals are cared for and aren’t subjected to cruel and unnecessary treatment. I think people would be more understanding if they were more informed about the protection of the animals and the benefits of the research being done.
AIHW. (2017, February 7). Deaths, Life expectancy – Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Retrieved from https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/life-expectancy-death/deaths-in-australia/contents/life-expectancy#dataAustralian life expectancy trends from 1890-2015
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (n.d.). 3302.0 – Deaths, Australia, 2015. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Previousproducts/3302.0Main%20Features52015?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=3302.0&issue=2015&num=&view=
Infant mortality rates in Australia 1915-2015
Foundation for Biomedical Research. (n.d.). Medical Advances | Foundation for Biomedical Research. Retrieved from https://fbresearch.org/medical-advances/Animal testing myths
Animal testing and medical advancements
Foundation for Biomedical Research. (n.d.). Animal Testing Alternatives | Foundation for Biomedical Research. Retrieved from https://fbresearch.org/biomedical-research/alternatives-to-animal-testing-and-research/Alternatives to animal testing
NSW Government – Animal ethics. (n.d.). Legislation | Animal Ethics Infolink. Retrieved from https://www.animalethics.org.au/legislationAnimal testing legislation
PETA. (n.d.). PETA’s Milestones. Retrieved from https://www.peta.org/about-peta/milestones/PETA history and milestones
Roser, M. (n.d.). Life Expectancy. Retrieved from https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancyIncrease in global life expectancy
RSPCA. (n.d.). Animal testing of medicines ; vaccines | Animal suffering ; ethics. Retrieved from https://www.rspca.org.uk/adviceandwelfare/laboratory/medicinesandvaccinesAnimal testing – medicines and vaccines
Understanding Animal Research. (n.d.). Understanding Animal Research Homepage. Retrieved from http://www.understandinganimalresearch.org.uk/Animal research- the facts
University of Oxford. (n.d.). Research using animals: an overview | University of Oxford. Retrieved from http://www.ox.ac.uk/news-and-events/animal-research/research-using-animals-an-overviewWhy animal research is necessary
Animals aren’t too different to humans
How many animals are usedVictoria State Government. (n.d.). Vaccine history timeline. Retrieved from https://www2.health.vic.gov.au/public-health/immunisation/immunisation-schedule-vaccine-eligibility-criteria/vaccine-history-timelineTimeline of vaccines in Australia
Overhaul Animal testing regulations!
Source: Woodland Park zooIs an animal’s life worth less than the results of an experiment? Millions of innocent animals are used for research and teaching every year and many of those animals die as a result. It was estimated that in 2015, over 9.9 million animals were used in research and teaching in Australia. A 2005 study estimated the number of animals used in scientific research globally, exceeded 115 million animals annually. Exact figures don’t seem to exist, there’s only estimates. Many Australian states have not reported the number of animals used in research, so the actual number could be much more. It’s time for some accountability. We need stricter policies to protect these animals and reporting should be mandatory.
The problem with the figures
Accurate statistical figures are hard to find, incomplete or just non-existent. Only four Australian states reported the number of animals used for scientific research in 2015. This makes it difficult to get accurate, up to date figures, which adds a level of suspicion to an already questionable system. Approximately 30% of the reported animals were in the ‘death as endpoint’ category which means exactly what you think it means. Their involvement in an experiment ends when they die.
The animals you don’t consider
Mice are the most common animal used in scientific research, but did you know that over 7000 dogs were used in scientific research (in four Australian states) in 2015? That same year, the University of Melbourne’s dental school was under fire for using live dogs in surgical experiments. Greyhounds were their dog of choice and the experiments conducted involved cruel and painful procedures. Several dogs were given dental implants and then were euthanized three months later so their jaws could be removed and studied. I have two dogs; this story broke my heart. They didn’t deserve that kind of treatment. Sadly, in 2015, at least 100 dogs used for research in Victoria were killed.
Source: Zookeeper JoeProtection is weak
Many people believe that animals used in research are protected against cruelty but the regulations in place are very difficult to enforce. Responsibility for animal welfare in scientific research rests with the state and territory governments. While there is a policy in place, it is not legally binding. In Australia, the policies in place to protect research animals states that the potential benefit to humans does not need to outweigh the impact on the animal. This means that an animal may be subjected to cruel and painful testing which may result in death, even if the possible benefit to humans is minimal. It’s unclear what the minimum benefit to humans needs to be or if there even is one. The University of Melbourne thought dental work was a perfectly acceptable reason to kill dogs.
Is animal testing even accurate?
In 2004, the FDA estimated that more than 92% of drugs that passed animal testing, failed human trials. That’s a huge failure rate for the number of animals that suffer in the process. Where is the line drawn? How far is too far? With millions of innocent animals dying each year, something needs to be done.
Overhaul the system, save lives
Without stricter policies forcing states to report the number of animals used, we will never truly know how many animals are dying due to scientific research. It also gives some free reign when it comes to deciding whether to use animals or not. If you don’t have to report it, then why second guess it? We can do more to protect these animals, we can do more to stop unnecessary testing. A nationally enforced standard in reporting as well as stricter policies on how and when animals can be used in research would be a start. A set date to ban animal testing could accelerate research and advance alternatives faster. We can do more to work towards a world without animal testing.
ABC. (2013, August 1). New code, same suffering: animals in the lab. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-01/merkes-and-buttrose-animal-testing/4857604Changes to The Australian code of practice for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes
Non-human primates are hardly protected
AKHTAR, A. (2015). The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 24(04), 407-419. doi:10.1017/s0963180115000079
Problems of successful translation to humans of data from animal experimentation
Annually more than 115 million animals are used in experimentation
Australian statistics – Choose Cruelty Free. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://choosecrueltyfree.org.au/australian-statistics/Australian figures of animals in scientific research
Death as end point figures
Baby gorilla introduction sessions showing progress in tiny steps. (2015, December 17). Retrieved from http://blog.zoo.org/2015/12/baby-gorilla-introduction-sessions.htmlBaby gorilla photo
Dobbin, M. (2015, December 5). Victoria lab experiments kill 100 dogs for drug and dental research. Retrieved from https://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/victoria/victoria-lab-experiments-kill-100-dogs-for-drug-and-dental-research-20151204-glg0g1.html100 dogs killed in Victorian experiments
University of Melbourne’s Dental school uses greyhounds in experiments
greyhound | Baby Animal Zoo. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.babyanimalzoo.com/dogs-with-jobs-racing-greyhound-puppies/greyhoundGreyhound photo
Harding, A. (2004, August 6). More compounds failing Phase I. Retrieved from https://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/23003/title/More-compounds-failing-Phase-I/FDA says 92% of drugs that past animal testing, fail human trials
Humane Research. (2015). 2015 Statistics of Animal Use in Australian Research and Teaching. Retrieved April 2018, from http://www.humaneresearch.org.au/statistics/statistics_2015Australian figures on animals in scientific research
Merkes, M. (2015, May 7). Australia failing to protect non-human primates in research. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/australia-failing-to-protect-non-human-primates-in-research-41096Changes to Australian code of practice for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes
Non-human primates are hardly protected
Taylor, K., Gordon, N., Langley, G., ; Higgins, W. (2005). Estimates for worldwide laboratory animal use in 2005. Retrieved from The Humane Society Institute for Science and Policy website: http://animalstudiesrepository.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013;context=acwp_labGlobal estimates for number of animals used in scientific research
Taylor, K., Rego, L., ; Cruelty Free International. (2014). EU statistics on animal experiments for 2014. Retrieved from Altex website: http://www.altex.ch/resources/altex_2016_4_465_468_Letter_Taylor11.pdfStatistics of animals used for scientific research in Europe (2014)
Genetically modified foods are a blessing!
Source: health cautionsThe general perception of genetically modified food seems to be quite negative. A lot of people I talk to see it as ethically questionable. But is it really as bad as people think? No, it’s not. In fact, genetically modifying foods has been around for centuries, we’ve just advanced the way we do it.
What is genetic modification?
For centuries our ancestors influenced the DNA of organisms by using selective breeding to combine certain traits. Without selective breeding, we wouldn’t have corn as we know it today. Gene splicing to modify foods began in the 1990’s and is basically the same idea as selective breeding but much more precise. Scientists cut a single-cell organism’s DNA and insert genes from another organism. This allows the crop to take on the desired trait of the selected gene.
What are the benefits?
There’s many benefits to altering the genetics of food. We can grow pest resistant, drought resistant, longer lasting crops. Extremely helpful for farmers who already have it tough at the best of times. Corn, soybeans, beef, dairy and sugar are just a few foods that are often genetically modified. According to the United States Department of Agriculture, in 2015 94% of soybean crops in the U.S were genetically modified. One common genetic modification is Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) which is a bacteria toxic to most pets. Crops are modified to produce the same toxin as Bt so that they are protected from pests. In 2001, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) determined that Bt corn and Bt cotton were safe for humans and the environment. This type of modification saves farmers money, time and means they don’t have to use nasty pesticides on their crops.
Another interesting benefit to genetically modifying crops is the potential for medical advancements. Edible plant vaccines could be used to immunize against numerous diseases. Imagine feeding your kids an apple to be vaccinated instead of giving them a nasty jab. That would save some ear wrenching tears on the drive home. One example of this is the production and successful testing of transgenic potatoes that were produced to deliver an immunization against diarrhea. Another life saver for parents!
Why do GM foods get a bad rap?
One claim is that they’re bad for you but there’s no evidence to suggest this at all. GM foods have been declared safe for humans and the environment. In fact, some are a lot better for you! Some GM food is modified to have extra vitamins and minerals. Golden rice was created by Swiss researchers in 2000 and was developed to aid areas with vitamin A deficiencies. Golden rice produces the vitamin A precursor beta-carotene which the body converts into vitamin A. Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) kills 1-2 million people annually. By producing rice, a staple food in a lot of VAD-affected countries, with beta-carotene, VAD can be tackled in a much more efficient and cost-effective way.
Source: WikipediaSome people think it’s unnatural to modify genes but scientist from Peru and Belgium discovered in a 2015 study that a naturally occurring bacteria gene had found its way into the genome of cultivated sweet potatoes. The gene they found is responsible for producing growth hormones. GM foods can happen naturally, and it doesn’t seem so crazy to give a helping hand in bettering our crops.
The fact that we have advanced to this level of accuracy is an incredible achievement. We can save farmers an incredible amount of stress, time, money and heartache. We get more sustainable food sources which provide an abundance of vitamins and minerals and we can even look forward to needle-free vaccines.
Progress is scrutinised Unfortunately, the progress in GM food research is constantly under scrutiny due to the ethical concerns. The labelling of genetically modified foods is often a hot topic of debate with calls for stricter guidelines, concerns over the safety is regularly questioned despite GM food being deemed completely safe and consumers are looking for more organic non-GM food options putting pressure on companies to move away from genetically modified crops. Interestingly, a 2016 study found low levels of understanding and numerous misconceptions about GM food. People tend to fear what they don’t understand, and GM food is a victim of misconception. Communication about the process and its benefits needs to be clearer for people to trust the science. If people understand exactly what genetically modified food is and the benefits to society, they may change their opinion on them. Currently, it’s a subject which is followed by a dark cloud of unnecessary scepticism and we need to clear the sky. The advancements in GM foods are extremely beneficial for everyone and something to be proud of.
Academies of Science finds GMOs not harmful to human health. (2016, May 17). Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2016/05/17/gmos-safe-academies-of-science-report-genetically-modified-food/84458872/GM food is safe for humans according to a 2year study
Brief overview of Bt modification
Ankeny, R. A. (2014, June 30). Making a meal of GM food labelling. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/making-a-meal-of-gm-food-labelling-28339GM food labelling regulations and policies
Baskin Engineering. (2004). GMO – Benefits. Retrieved from https://classes.soe.ucsc.edu/cmpe080e/Spring05/projects/gmo/benefits.htmSome benefits of GM food
Bredahl, L. (2001). Determinants of Consumer Attitudes and Purchase Intentions with Regard to Genetically Modified Food – Results of a Cross-National Survey. Journal of Consumer Policy, 24(1), 23-61. doi:10.1023/a:1010950406128
Consumer attitudes towards GM food
Reasons why consumers are sceptical about GM food
Bt crops. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Bt_CropsExplanation of Bt crops
Deutsche Welle (www.dw.com). (n.d.). When GMO comes naturally | DW | 22.04.2015. Retrieved from http://www.dw.com/en/when-gmo-comes-naturally/a-18399170Natural GMOs – cultivated sweet potatoes with growth hormone gene
Ganzel, B. (2009). The GMO Age Begins. Retrieved from https://livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe70s/crops_10.htmlHistory of GM crops
Bt crop development
Gewin, V. (2003). Genetically Modified Corn— Environmental Benefits and Risks. PLoS Biology, 1(1), e8. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0000008
GM corn benefits and risks – Bt crops
Selective plant breeding gave us corn as we know it
Golden rice. (2018, March 17). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_riceGolden rice history and development
Golden rice picture
Greene, C., Wechsler, S. J., Adalja, A., & Hanson, J. (2016). Economic issues in the coexistence of organic, genetically engineered (GE), and non-GE Crops. Retrieved from United States Department of Agriculture website: https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/44041/56750_eib-149.pdf?v=42424GM crops began production in 1996
Soybean, corn, sugar and cotton are common GM crops
Kyndt, T., Quispe, D., Zhai, H., Jarret, R., Ghislain, M., Liu, Q., … Gheysen, G. (2015). The genome of cultivated sweet potato contains Agrobacterium T-DNAs with expressed genes: An example of a naturally transgenic food crop. PNAS. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1419685112Natural GMOs – cultivated sweet potatoes with growth hormone gene
McFadden, B. R., & Lusk, J. L. (2016). What consumers don’t know about genetically modified food, and how that affects beliefs. The FASEB Journal, 30(9), 3091-3096. doi:10.1096/fj.201600598
Low understanding and misconceptions about GM food
Mendelsohn, M., Kough, J., Vaituzis, Z., ; Matthews, K. (2003). Are Bt crops safe? Retrieved from Environmental Protection Agency website: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-08/documents/are_bt_crops_safe.pdfBt crops are safe for humans and the environment
Miller, C. (2016, May 30). Consumers Don’t Really Know What GMO Means, New Study Finds. Retrieved from http://www.growingproduce.com/farm-marketing/consumers-dont-really-know-what-gmo-means-new-study-finds/Article on consumers low understanding and misconceptions about GM food
Monsanto. (2017). History of plant breeding. Retrieved from https://monsanto.com/app/uploads/2017/06/history-of-plant-breeding.pdfHistory of plant breeding
Explanation of GM food and process
Non-GMO demand growing despite report that says GMOs are safe. (2016, May 18). Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/05/18/gmo-report-not-likely-to-change-minds-over-gmo-concern/84501686/Consumer demand for non-GM food
Nordqvist, C. (2017, December 14). What is beta carotene? What are the benefits? Retrieved from https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/252758.phpExplanation of beta carotene
Steen, J. (2016, July 15). GMOs: What Are They, The Risks and Where Do We Find Them? Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/03/04/genetically-modified-food_n_9370946.htmlThe Australian – article on GM food risks
Surprising Health Benefits of Corn. (2017, December 13). Retrieved from https://healthcautions.com/surprising-health-benefits-of-corn/Picture of corn
Tacket, C. O. (2005). Plant-derived vaccines against diarrheal diseases. Vaccine, 23(15), 1866-1869. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2004.11.019
Needle-free vaccines through GM plants
the definition of gene splicing. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.dictionary.com/browse/gene–splicingDefinition of gene splicing
center36195000The problem with genetically modified food.
Source: Natural Society
What are the risks of genetically modifying food? GM foods are still relatively new, and the long-term effects are still unknown. With rising safety concerns and calls for stricter labelling regulations, transparency is needed for consumers to make informed decisions about their food. We all deserve to know what we’re eating.
What is genetically modified food?
GM foods have had their DNA spliced and an extra gene from a different species added. This allows the plant to take on the trait of the selected gene. One example of this is in Bt pest resistant crops. Crops are genetically modified to produce the same toxin as Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) which is harmful to most pests. But there are serious concerns over the safety of Bt for humans and animals. Bt crops have been declared safe for humans and the environment but with only a little over 20 years in use, it’s hard to say what the long term effects could be.
Glyphosate tolerant crops
1320800102616000Another major health concern is glyphosate tolerant crops. These crops are modified to tolerate high levels of glyphosate, the main ingredient in herbicides like Roundup. A study lead by Dr Michael Antoniou, Head of the Gene Expression Therapy Group at King’s College London, found that glyphosate can cause serious health problems including liver disease, at doses thousands of times lower than allowed by law.
Source: India martAnother study published in April 2018, showed the effects of glyphosate on mice gut microbiota and neurobehavior. The data showed that exposure the glyphosate-based herbicides (GBH) induced an increase of anxiety and depression and reinforced the link between genetic modification and GBH toxicity in mice. The World Health Organisation has even declared glyphosate a carcinogen. Companies are dousing their crops in herbicide and we’re literally, eating it all up.
Labelling GM food in Australia
Labelling of GM food can be confusing, and regulations need to be stricter so that consumers can be fully informed about their food options. There’s currently several labelling exemptions in Australia which include:
highly refined foods that were derived from genetically modified ingredients. This includes sugars and oils.
Animals that are fed a GM diet are not themselves considered genetically modified. This means cows who produce milk can have a genetically modified diet and the milk they produce does not need to be labelled as GM. Same goes for meat products.
Restaurants do not need to specify if they have used GM ingredients in the preparation of their meals.
With such serious health concerns, it only seems fair to give consumers the full story and these exemptions stop that from happening. It’s also important to highlight the risks and further research the long-term effects. Without fully knowing the effects, we could be setting ourselves up for serious harm.
Transparency is essential
Scientists and medical professionals sit on both sides of this debate, so it can get difficult trying to decipher all the information out there. The one thing that stuck with me is the fact that GM food has only been on the market since the 90’s. How could we possibly know the full effects of these chemicals and modifications when they’re all so new? Numerous studies have shown the potential harm GM food can cause and it’s not pretty. We absolutely deserve to know what is in our food and how it is being derived. Consumers should know exactly how and when genetic modification has been used in their food and stricter policies on labelling need to be considered. We also need more research into the true health effects of GM foods on humans before a definitive decision is made about their safety.
Aitbali, Y., Ba-M’hamed, S., Elhidar, N., Nafis, A., Soraa, N., & Bennis, M. (2018). Glyphosate based- herbicide exposure affects gut microbiota, anxiety and depression-like behaviors in mice. Neurotoxicology and Teratology, 67, 44-49. doi:10.1016/j.ntt.2018.04.002
Study on glyphosate toxicity in mice and potential harm to humans
American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM). (n.d.). Genetically Modified Foods. Retrieved from https://www.aaemonline.org/gmo.phpGM food is unsafe
Recommendations to reduce health risks
Bio Herbicide. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.indiamart.com/proddetail/bio-herbicide-12851150573.htmlCrop spraying picture
Bt Crops – SourceWatch. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Bt_CropsExplanation of Bt crops
Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ). (2016). Genetically modified (GM) food labelling. Retrieved from Australian Government website: http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/consumer/gmfood/labelling/Pages/default.aspxGM food labelling standards and exemptions in Australia
The GE Process – Institute for Responsible Technology. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://responsibletechnology.org/gmo-education/the-ge-process/Process of genetic modification
Glyphosate. (2018, May 3). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GlyphosateExplanation of glyphosate – ingredient in RoundUpRoseboro, K. (2017, February 11). New Risks of GMO Food, Glyphosate Uncovered: Scientist’s Ground-Breaking Research | Global Research – Centre for Research on Globalization. Retrieved from HYPERLINK “https://www.globalresearch.ca/new-risks-of-gmo-food-glyphosate-uncovered-scientists-ground-breaking-research/5574264” https://www.globalresearch.ca/new-risks-of-gmo-food-glyphosate-uncovered-scientists-ground-breaking-research/5574264
Interview with Dr Michael Antoniou, Head of the Gene Therapy Group, on the effects of glyphosate
Risks of glyphosate to humans
Sarich, C. (2014, December 10). Study Links GMOs to Over 22 Different Diseases. Retrieved from http://naturalsociety.com/study-links-gmos-22-different-diseases/Cover picture
Studies show dangers of glyphosate
Smith, J. (2017, January 15). 10 Reasons to Avoid GMOs – Institute for Responsible Technology. Retrieved from https://responsibletechnology.org/10-reasons-to-avoid-gmos/Reasons people are sceptical about GM food
Steen, J. (2016, July 15). GMOs: What Are They, The Risks and Where Do We Find Them? Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/03/04/genetically-modified-food_n_9370946.htmlThe Australian – article on GM food risks
Urban, S. (2010, August 23). 8 Reasons GMOs are Bad for You – Organic Authority. Retrieved from http://www.organicauthority.com/foodie-buzz/eight-reasons-gmos-are-bad-for-you.htmlReasons people are sceptical about GM food