GMOs part 4: Did ancient farmers test their genetically modified tomatoes

In Part 3, you learned that the breeding of plants and animals by farmers is genetic modification. I used the example of the tomato, which was breed so much it’s now unrecognizable from its wild type (see picture below). Thousands of genes were changed well before scientists got their hands on it.

Which begs the next question…

Q: Did the ancient South American farmers test their genetically modified tomatoes for safety? Did they ensure their tomatoes didn't cause cancer at age 60?

A: No, they did not. If a food made them ill or caused death directly after consumption, they could determine it was poisonous. However, other than that, our ancient ancestors were very limited in what they could test for. Determining long-term health effects, for example, like causing cancer at age 60, was far more difficult. Linking long-term food consumption with disease requires the techniques of modern epidemiology and meticulous data collection. And even with modern epidemiology we still can't agree on even the most basic foods. (Eggs are good for you. Eggs are bad for you)

Furthermore, long-term health was not their priority. Their priority was generating enough food to live past their first birthday, through the winter, or to reproductive age. If a genetically modified food would kill them at age 60, but yielded more crop, more calories, and fed more people throughout the winter, for them, it was a winner.

Q: What about the "wild" tomato? The one from nature? Can we assume it was safe?

A: No. There was no reason to assume it was safe either. Assuming something is safe solely because it comes from nature is an appeal to nature, the fallacious argument I discussed in prior posts. Nature did not shape itself around us. This is anthropocentrism and a fundamental misunderstanding of ecology and evolution. Natural selection shapes plants and animals for their own survival, not ours. In fact, sometimes nature evolves things to intentionally hurt us. Let me demonstrate this point by posing another question…

Q: Why do certain plants (like the opium poppy and the tobacco plant) synthesize neurotoxins (like opium and nicotine) when they serve no physiologic function for the plant?

A: They are insecticides. Plants are unable to run away from their greatest predator, animals, so to prevent being eaten, they wage chemical warfare on us, and over millions of years evolved neurotoxic chemicals. Plants are not our friends. We just try to pick the ones that don't kill us.

Key Points

1. We have been genetically modifying foods for millennia.

2. Determining long-term safety of a food, whether genetically modified or not, is challenging.

3. The strategy of trusting "wild" foods or what our ancestors did is unreliable, as neither strategy was purposed with our modern long-term health goals in mind.

In my next post, I will explore just how much of our food is genetically modified.