Frankenfoods Developing Faster Than Means to Test Them

Nanofoods promise to make us smarter, help us live longer, feed the poor, block cholesterol, make milkshakes tastier, and reduce disease. But you've got a right to be skeptical of scientists messing with our food, and demand to know exactly what ingredients are in the food we eat — ingredients that can be 100,000 times smaller than a grain of sand, reports Dan Mitchell in The Big Money's Business of Food blog. Mitchell is worried that the food industry won't fully understand or thoroughly analyze the potential risks of these new foods until they come under attack after something bad happens. Further worrying are the warnings of a lawyer who has represented the industry when he explains that "the commercialization of nanotechnology has rapidly outpaced the research to address possible human health or environmental risks."

It may make our products tastier, drought resistant and world-saving, but GM foods are unlikely to be used solely in the service of public health — health concerns haven't stopped the industry pumping our foods with sugar in the past, why will this be any different?

A Time article recently reported on attempts to detoxify cotton seeds, which are high in protein and may initially get into our food supply through using them to feed fish and animals. Messing with cotton isn't necessarily a good idea, as results can be unpredictable. Monsanto's GM cotton seeds have apparently failed miserably to produce a crop in recent years, whilst Monsanto has refused to pay compensation to farmers who were convinced by pervasive advertising campaigns — farmers often driven to suicide after a failed crop leaves them with nothing but debt. Now is a good time to be reminded of the old pro-poison propaganda that assured us that toxic pesticide "DDT is good for Me-e-e!"

[Photo credit: hyku]