Should We Be Worried About GMOs? – Glad You Asked S1


( music playing )Christophe:
This is the island of Maui.
We’re here because this place
has been at the center
of a fierce debate
about whether we should grow
and eat genetically
modified food.
And that question is only
getting more important.At the current rate,
we will have to grow more food
in the next 30 years
than we have in all
of human history.
Doing that without destroying
the environment that we live in will be one of the defining
challenges of our generation.And many experts argue
that to do that,
we’ll have to engineer
the genes of our food.
But the safety of
that technology has been
controversial for decades.
So, should we be worried
about genetically modified food?( music playing )– Good morning.
– Hey, how’s it going? – How is everybody today?
– Fantastic. Chocolate peanut butter.
Chocolate peanut butter. – Oh, my God.
– How is it? – It’s really good?
– I can’t tell if that
was good or bad. It’s Reese’s peanut butter
for breakfast. – In a Cheerio.
– I love it. Why are we here? – We are here in my home.
– “We are here in my home.” I have brought you here. I have brought you guys here
to talk about GMOs. I’m curious to hear how
you grew up thinking about them. ‘Cause for me, I was–
I was definitely taught that GMOs are a terrible thing. In my family,
it was just never something
that was talked about ever. I was taught that
the big business around GMOs is something to be,
like, hated. All these labels started
appearing, like this one, “Non-GMO project verified,”
which seems to signal to people that there’s something harmful
about GMOs. There’s one thing at this table
that does contain genetically modified organisms
and is labeled as such. – And I’m curious if y’all
can find it.
– Huh. – It’s not the coffee.
– This one says non-GMO. It’s the one that
y’all haven’t looked at yet. – The fruit. No.
– Mm-mm “Partially produced
with genetic engineering.”
It is the Cheerios. Alex: Oh, there it is.
It’s at the very
bottom of the box. Sneaky little– If you look through
the ingredients, you can see
whole grain oats, sugar, peanut butter,
dextrose, corn starch, and corn syrup, and corn that
was probably produced with
genetic engineering. In a way, it’s almost like
a status symbol for your foods if you’re able to identify
that all your foods have the positive label
of being GMO-free. Cleo:
I guess my question to you,
Christophe, is it a good label?
Like, is that something
that I should be looking for? Um… To understand how we got here, we have to talk about
the first GMO. This is the Flavr Savr tomato. Leading up to its launch, people called this
the super tomato. It became major news. The future is now,
at least in terms
of the American diet. Genetically altered tomatoes
are a step closer to your
supermarket tonight. The new tomatoes will soon be
on a store shelf near you. When it hit shelves, it became
the first commercial crop
that was genetically modified. It was designed to be less perishable
than regular tomatoes. What followed was a new
generation of bio-engineering
initiatives that promised to feed
the world, including things
like golden rice, a GMO enriched with beta keratin
to combat blindness and death from vitamin A deficiency. Researchers believe
they have found a way to add critical nutrients
to rice. Man:Vitamin A deficiency
is a pervasive and silent
of malnourished children
in the third world.
But over the next few years,
public perception of GMOs went from gentle curiosity
like this… As long as it was–
it was healthy, you know? No– no health risks.
Yeah, I’d consider it. …to bitter divisiveness
like this. Hell no, GMO. Hell no, GMO. Other labs tried
to replicate that study
and found that it wasn’t true. – No, actually that is not true.
– Yes. ( speaking foreign language ) One side says that modifying
food is totally harmless and the other side says that
it’s a serious threat to us. They take viruses and bacteria
and insecticides and put them into the DNA. More often than not, they’re inserting viruses or bacteria into these plants. But that’s not exactly
how it works, so let’s clear things up. – Cleo, you free right now?
– Sure. All right. So genetic
engineering works by taking
a tiny piece of DNA from one organism
and putting it inside
of another organism. That tiny piece of DNA
is called a gene. It is a set of instructions
that tells the organism how to express a trait. You can kind of think of that
like taking a recipe from one cookbook
and putting it inside
of another one. So one set of instructions here
contain a really special trait, and it’s bookmarked. – Insect killer.
– Exactly. Grandma’s
insect killer recipe. This one page tells
that bacteria how to create this protein
that kills insects. Okay, so how does this gene get from the bacteria
to the corn? You can use kind of this
bacterium that naturally
goes into the other plant and, like, dumps the DNA off or you can use something
called a gene gun. The gene gun literally
shoots gold particles
that are covered in DNA… – Dope.
– …into cells of the corn. This corn plant
will then produce those same
insecticide proteins. And what that means
is that farmers now
would not have to spray those corn plants
with insecticide. So it’s not as though GMOs are using a small part
of a bacteria and putting it into corn
or something else. It’s more like they’re taking
a small instruction that a bacteria has and allowing corn
to also have that instruction. – Is that right?
– Exactly. So what do we know
about how safe it is – to eat something like this?
– Mm, let me show you. In the past 20 years that
we’ve been eating these crops, there have been no negative
health impacts on consumers. – That’s great.
– Yeah. I learned all of this
from Pamela Ronald. She is a geneticist
at UC Davis. We’ve been genetically
engineering many different types of plants and genetically engineering
medicines for over 40 years, and there hasn’t been
a single instance of harm to human health
or the environment. Christophe:
We know that from
thousands of studies,
but they’re probably best
summarized in this one from the National Academies
of Sciences, Engineering,
and Medicine. So this is like a meta study
of thousands of reports. Can I get a highlighter?
Great. Cleo:
There’s some evidence that GE
insect-resistant crops have had benefits
to human health by reducing
insecticide poisoning. The research,
blah, blah, blah, blah, of GE foods
reveals no differences that would implicate
a higher risk to human health from eating GE foods than from eating
their non-GE counterparts. – That’s the money line.
– That’s it. This seems so certain, but it– it also seems like
this is such a big controversy. It is.
So the 2015 Pew Research poll found the majority of Americans believe that it’s not safe to eat genetically
modified food, but almost 90% of scientists
say that they’re safe. And this gap is the biggest of any politicized
scientific issue. So that means bigger
than climate change,
bigger than vaccines. It makes me feel like
there must be some other issue with GMO products
or GMO companies that people
are really struggling with. – That’s what I want
to figure out, yeah.
– Like, it can’t be this. So the thing is,
as much as people might worry about GMO fruits
and vegetables, you’re not really likely
to find them in produce. They’re in cheap processed foods
made from GMO corn and soy. And the vast majority
of GMO crops don’t actually
even wind up in food. You know, for the most part,they are turned into biofuels
or into feed.
In the U.S.,
where over 90% of corn
is genetically modified,
just 10% is turned into things
that people actually consume.
So all that genetic engineering
allowed us to do was to grow crops like that on a bigger scale
than ever before. Could it have more to do
with how the business of GMOs is actually implemented? There’s one place that I think can help us answer
that question, and it’s in the middle
of the Pacific Ocean.( music playing )Hawaii is ground zerofor developing new
genetically engineered crops.
In the 1990s, the entire
papaya industry in Hawaii was basically
on the verge of collapse. Plants started to be infected
by papaya ringspot virus. This problem persisted
for decades, and then came something
called the rainbow papaya. This was a transgenic variety that was designed
to resist the virus.Until 2017,
this was the only GMO fruit
that was sold in the U.S.This fruit was proof
that genetic engineering could really benefit
both consumers and farmers.But it also kicked off
a long debate about what
genetic engineering
means for the state
of Hawaii.
It’s hosted more open air
experimental field tests
than any other state
in the country.
And the U.S. grows more GMOsthan any other country
in the world.
And all of these companies
are here because
Hawaii’s tropical climate allows for three to four
plantings of seeds per year, as opposed to just one on most parts
of the mainland U.S. It kind of creates this
ultimate outside laboratory for seed companies.We’re gonna go visit
one of these test fields
that’s owned by Bayer with
members of the SHAKA movement.
So tell me what SHAKA is. The SHAKA movement is the Sustainable
Hawaiian Agriculture for the Keiki and the ‘Aina. Okay, we’re here in Kihei,and these are
the Hale Piilani homes,
and they are next tothe Monsanto test field
here in Kihei.
Now these people are right
on top of the problem. What they’re doing
in the test fieldis they’re trying to see
how much herbicide
the plant
and the seed can take.
We know tests–
the pesticide drifts,
especially with this wind,and it would bring it
right into these homes,straight into these homes.This was one of the reasons
for the moratorium
was the proximity
of these test fields
to these homes
we’re standing next to.
In 2014, Maui County
passed a moratorium on the research and development
and production of GMOs. Man: Hawaii is the center
of a fight between the companies
who make crop seeds here and residents who say
they are being poisoned. Hawaii’s Maui County passed
one of the strongest anti-GMO measures ever. A battle over the Maui County
GMO moratorium is headed to court. Eventually, that moratorium was overruled
in a federal court. We were just asking
to slow down,
take a breath, stop, and let’s see what’s going on
in terms of experimentation with these open fields
putting all these people
in danger, right? It was easy for the industry
to turn around and go,
“Oh, you’re anti-GMO.” Are you anti-science
when you’re being
openly tested on? And the fact
that they’re going, “We’re experimenting
with this corn
and we’re gonna see how much pesticide
it can handle before it dies.” Look where you’re doing it. You’re doing it
where people live. Okay, let me clarify
what they’re talking about. One of the most popular kinds
of genetically engineered traits is something called
herbicide tolerance. By giving a plant a gene
that makes it resistant to one specific kind
of chemical,farmers can spray herbicide
on their plants to kill weeds
without having to worry
about harming their crops.
So even though
the other most common
kind of genetically
engineered trait successfully reduced
the need for insecticide, this particular GMO trait actually encourages the use
of more herbicides.Since 1996,
when the biotech company
first introduced crops
tolerant to glyphosate,
that’s the active ingredient
in the herbicide Roundup,
the use of that chemical
has skyrocketed.
Now, glyphosate has
traditionally been considered a relatively safe herbicide,
but in 2015, the World Health Organization
concluded that it likely causes cancer
to humans who are exposed to it.Now there are thousands
of lawsuits against Bayer,
which acquired Monsanto,for failing to warn consumers
of those risks.
We reached out to Bayer
for comment, but at this time,
they haven’t provided
a statement.( music playing )I can count three chickens
from where I stand. But there are more
everywhere. Oop! Lorrin:
My name is Lorrin Pang.
I was born and raised
in Hawaii.
I got involved in this issue
of GM growing.
Walk me through
what the concerns
that people here have – about those kinds of crops
in particular.
– Yeah. The Maui community
was quite upset about
corporate agriculture in Hawaii and on Maui. Our concern
are the pesticides, okay? You’re using
too many pesticides.When the stuff you put
is blowing on the wind,
and you haven’t told
anybody downwind
who got drifted
about informed consent,
and they never got
to respond,
that’s unethical. This is the framework
of human experimentation. I will give them
the benefit of the doubt that they want
to feed the world
and use less pesticides. I will give them that. That does seem to be
something that we hear a lot – on this topic is this idea…
– What? Feed the world? …that GMOs are a necessary
technology to feed the world. Corporations and scientists
have shown that’s the goals. “What do you want?”
“Feed the world.” I’ll give that to you.
Maybe we’re trying
to feed the world. But the process
that we get there seems to trample on
certain people’s rights.( music playing )We’re about to go talk
to Dr. Harold Keyser. He’s going to explain to us what
genetically engineered crops look like here in Hawaii. And we’re climbing up a hill.( music playing )That’s Harold.
He found a chameleon. – ( indistinct chatter )
– ( squeals ) – They have a very long tongue.
– ( gasps ) Oh, my God. Oh, my God. ( squeals )
It’s on the camera. It’s so hard to separate
the technology from
its context of big AG. – Mm-hmm.
– Do you feel like that is going to make this argument
endure for a long time? Like, when are we going
to stop talking about this? Genetic engineering
is safe as any other form
of plant breeding. Regulation is so expensive, you know, to get it through all the stages at EPA and Food and Drug
Administration, to get a new product out. And, I mean,
I think that’s also part of why the focus has been
on the major crops. Because they spent all this
money and then that’s where
they’re gonna, you know, they’re gonna go after
the big payoffs first. Corn, soybean,
alfalfa, cotton, things that are on,
you know, big acreages. You know,
there’s been consolidation. And that basically crowds out
everyone except for the large
ones and incentivizes– Oh, yeah.
Somebody with the really deep–
probably deep pockets. Christophe:
So how did these companies
become so powerful?
Well, at the same time
that GMO technology
was taking off, the seed industry was also
undergoing major changes. Let me show you how. Each of these seeds
represents an individual
seed company back in 1996. By 2018, all of these
were fully or partially owned
by Monsanto,which made it the biggest
seed company in the world.
The pharmaceutical company
Bayer bought Monsanto
for $63 billion. But it’s not just Bayer.
Dow and DuPont merged
to become Corteva, and ChemChina
acquired Syngenta. Today these four companies control over 60%
of the world’s seed sales. Those companies patent
the genetics of their seeds, which means that farmers
can’t harvest their own seeds. They have to buy them
every year. And because these seeds work
hand in hand with the chemicals produced by the same companies, you can’t really have one
without the other. So for some, adopting GMOs means
buying into a system where, for the first time
in the history of agriculture, farmers are not
fully controlling and owning their seeds.But even though there’s
immense pressure to do so,
not every farmer
is buying into that system.
( dog barking ) – ( indistinct chatter )
– Hey, how’s it going? ( muttering ) – How’s it going?
Nice to see you.
– All right. How you doing? This is, like,
in full operation. We just put this extension in. You can see this is where
the door used to be. We took that shade house down,
poured the slab, and then did all this. The system comes on. – And do you hear that sounds?
– Uh-huh. That’s the sound of money.We produce about five to 600
pounds of greens a week
and we do it on
2,500 square feet
on a 9,000 square-foot lot.So you could say I’m probablyone of the largest smallest
farmers here in Hawaii.
This conversation about
genetic engineering in food has gotten so much attention
as kind of a focal point for how this conversation
is happening all
across the world. Yeah, because
the corporate takeover
of agriculture, so to speak, has been consolidation.
I mean, it’s happening today. Has been a big issue.
The farmers are going back
to these companies going, “Hey, man, we got bugs
attacking our plants.” “Well, here.”
And they start giving them petrochemical pesticides
and herbicides. And it didn’t take long
before that just spiraled
out of control. Well, the farmers
are just trying to find ways
to make ends meet. That created–
that whole attack on the plant
created a dysfunction, and that’s when
genetic engineering came in. So I feel it was a dysfunction
on top of a dysfunction, which creates
dysfunction squared. Am I against GMO? Um, I just don’t support it. You know, as a farmer,
I want to grow food for people without using
that kind of technology. And, um,
so that’s my main interest.Little did I realize that
I could actually make a living
on a postage stamp
with agriculture. This is where we grow
what I call the chocolate cake. – You can take it–
– It went straight through. This is like black gold. We’re here in
paradise on Earth.
We can grow a lot of food. – Here I am on Maui.
I mean, what more can I ask?
– Here we are. – Yeah. Seriously.
– Yeah. The idea of genetically
modified food is so often sold to us
based off of future promises–crops that can resist
a changing climate,
or with better yield,or with improved nutrients
to feed the world. More efficient water use, bigger root systems,
nutrient uptake. There’s definitely potential. Christophe:
But GMOs today don’t
live up to that potential.
Right now, most aren’t even
turned into food.
The real reason
to worry about GMOs
isn’t that
they’re unsafe to eat.
It’s how they’re being
used today.
It’s the pesticides and
the herbicides we worry about.
This is in no way
farming to feed people. Christophe:And right now
the agricultural practices
that some GMOs encourage
have demonized a technology that objectively could help
a lot of people.That’s part of why in 2013,anti-GMO activists
in the Philippines
destroyed a test field
for golden rice,
setting public sector research
back by months. Vincent:
It’s collapsing under
its own weight.
The technology
is not producing
the promise that it said
it’s going to feed the world
and all that stuff. Christophe:
The biggest tragedy of all
would be if the GMOs
that could help people the most
fail because of concerns that don’t have anything to do
with the technology itself. That’s what
we should be worried about
when we worry about GMOs. Thank you so much for watching. For more episodes
of “Glad You Asked,” you can click the link
to the right. And for more amazing
learning content on YouTube, go ahead and click the link
on the bottom right. Thanks again.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

100 thoughts on “Should We Be Worried About GMOs? – Glad You Asked S1”

  1. Izzy Space says:

    Would love to see a video about the implications of gmos on the farmers.

  2. Faisal NH says:

    As a farmer, being independent is a must. Able to grow your seed that you harvest, know how to make your own fertilizer, pesticide, and herbicide. GMO, which initially made for human to have a better plant (Super Tomatoes, Rice with Vit. A), has turn into money grabbing industry,. By buying GMO seeds from Monsanto, you will need to buy their fertilizer, pesticide, herbicide, etc. Farmers won’t have their authority anymore, and could easily collapse if the the system fail.

  3. S W says:

    I truly think this video should be made free for public education purpose. The debate around GMO has been framed so out of control. There are valid reasons for better supervision around the development of GMO that isn't a deranged rant about "GMO makes 3 leg babies".

  4. Lara O'neal says:

    They’re messing with nature.

  5. Lara O'neal says:

    She’s probably paid by the government.

  6. Lara O'neal says:

    Thank God for these farmers who are not buying into this gmo mess. God bless these men.

  7. Smarty Gaming says:

    yeetus youtube primius

  8. BrosiaRS says:

    I have studied this topic quite extensively, from both the scientific and political perspectives.. and while you have done a great deal to objectively cover this topic, it seems, you have failed to mention or address one key aspect of this: the impact of IP laws (intellectual property laws). In countries, like China and Argentina, IP laws are a lot less harmfully constraining to such a technology. There are many issues revolving around IP laws and recombinant DNA technology, specifically pertaining to crops, that end up costing farmers more in countries like the US. In countries like China and Argentina, IP laws allow for more public sector development, prevent companies from suing in cases where cross-pollination had occurred, etc etc.. in countries like that, farmers especially are able to benefit greatly from adopting genetically modified seeds. Most of the ‘profits’ from the productivity gains go to farmers and consumers in those countries. This is the main reason why it’s so expensive for farmers in the US and many places like the US. They are unable to get publicly funded and developed seeds, kinda like a ‘generic prescription’ is to the pharmaceutical industry, and it is much more likely to harm the farming industry in general with lawsuits/etc, which are prohibitively and detrimentally costly. You should look into this and do another video.

  9. Yoga Sandhika says:

    Can't wait for new episode

  10. Victoria Méndez says:

    So gmos are like vaccines? Lol

  11. ramen wifi says:

    feels good having yt premium 🤣

  12. wiggly fruit says:

    The thing is you have to worry about pesticides
    Those chemicals harm the environment

  13. DiamondMiner says:

    I am the 58th comment, on a video made by a YouTuber with like a couple mil subs.

  14. freaky mel says:

    Hallo friends i am new in youtube premium members

  15. freaky mel says:

    Only the premium videos i can download can i download videos not premium anyone can answer me

  16. Steven Lin says:

    GMOs will save the environment

  17. King TravisSearles says:

    You keep doing this kind of stuff and one day the food will be eating you!

  18. King TravisSearles says:

    What's the effect on the streams or rivers and the animals that drink from or live in them? Don't mess with mothernature!

  19. sleepyboi says:

    I never thought of GMOs as being about workers rights.

  20. Jane A says:

    Monsanto does not need to be involved in or near our food supply. I think you’re missing the big picture.

    fact – We waste more food than any other country.

    GMOs are unnecessary science. The milk fiasco( rBst ) was Monsanto as well.. they said they wanted to produce more milk when the industry was awash with milk and caused a health crisis and a population allergic to cows milk. Monsanto shouldn’t be merging it should be out of business. Cancer is a byproduct of Monsanto gmos.

  21. Jane A says:

    This is the first time I’ve seen a vox that I disagreed with. I’m very disappointed that you didn’t call Monsanto out more thoroughly. Monsanto is a criminal among American corporations. .

  22. avokado man says:

    Oh yeah my premium

  23. Soda_YEET says:

    That's so little comments here

  24. Brxken lights says:

    Yep i pay for premium I'm rich

  25. Studio Q says:

    "why are we here"
    Idk product placement I guess

  26. BC borna says:

    this seems to be a "relatively" decent clip – BUT the dude lost me when he MINIMIZED the effects of "glyphosate" by calling it "RELATIVELY" safe 🤦‍♂️😱😬 it's a known carcinogen … biotech should focus on making plants resistant to pests and viruses NOT TO TOXIC pesticides … my 2 cents

  27. Cyrus Travel Showcase says:

    Great content produced by Vox, love this channel a lot, I believe this is just tip of the iceberg about GMOs, there's a lot more to be explored, and people in different perspective tend to have their stands and beliefs in GMOs.

  28. Norman Sargent says:

    The pollinators love pesticides and herbicides too.


  29. Dafne Gorostieta says:

    GMO = MONEY. That's all you have to worry about

  30. Brain Based Marketing says:

    Hmmmm…no health risks from GMOs? That was probably no known “direct” causes.

    And do you have a link to the study that showed there was no direct cause?

    Also, what about indirect effects on health?

    Did they see any “indirect causes”?
    If yes, can I get a link to that study as well?

  31. Kevin Olson says:

    Christophe, don't try to make GMO's acceptable. This is what you're trying to do.

  32. JGsteww says:

    I don't know why people are so wound up about round up it's made of plants itself

  33. Kyle Dupont says:

    The big problem is the seeds they sell cant be used again or harvested. That is a deplorable practice.

  34. Eugene Rhee says:

    Haha! Christophe tricked Vox into giving him a free vacation to Maui! But seriously, these “Glad you Asked” videos are great!

  35. Ryan Robichaud says:

    This may be the fairest attempt to get to truth in the GMO debate, as a farmer most of us are very pro GMO without thought, its good to look at the evidence on both sides. I am sure Vox's audience is mostly non farmers that are either on the fence or strait up anti GMO based on fear marketing, so Thanks Vox for getting as close to the truth as possible.

  36. Kevin Hayes says:

    While this was a fairly balanced documentary, it completely failed on one point. One of the most misunderstood points about GMOs are herbicide resistant crops. Many people claim this will lead to more herbicides used and this film insinuates this. Of course the use of the corresponding product will rise because farmers move away from any other herbicide they may have preciously used.

    The overall quantity of herbicides drops significantly, because the crops are protected from the impact of the herbicide and therefore are stronger and more resistant.

    Farmers have zero incentive to spray more herbicides than strictly needed, as it is very expensive.

    It would have been nice to see the narrative of the herbicide overspraying farmer debunked.

  37. Andrew Gibson says:

    Gmos are not harmful and only improve the production of plants. There is litteraly only benefits with gmos

  38. Vox says:

    There aren’t many conversations about food quite as polarized as the ones we have about genetically engineering crops. We chose to take a look at the gap between what GMOs promised to do and what most of them are designed to do — but there’s so much more that we weren’t able to fit into this episode. If you want to learn more, I’d really recommend checking out this compilation of smart answers to some of the most common questions about GMOs:

    That’s it for this season of Glad You Asked — thank you so much for watching!


  39. Tripurari Sharan says:


  40. Lam says:

    If I ate gmo foods since 1990, I would be dead right now. That’s what people who are anti-gmo we’re saying. The problem is more about big seed companies owning those rights like bayer who won’t share or be honest about their practices. However, we’re eating those same seeds because we can afford to thanks to them. Should we blame those companies for giving us a break on $$$? That’s where we’re at.

  41. Red Crow Crow says:

    Thank god, we dont have gmo in India every farmer living below the poverty line would have never been able to afford seed and died.

  42. Nick Cardaci says:

    Spotify My band😁: Friend of the Three

  43. Nick Cardaci says:

    Spotify My band😁: Friend of the Three

  44. GH says:

    The videos are really good but I think you guys should leave out the acting.

  45. FREEWILL Farms says:

    We waste vast amounts of foods and resources to farm in the industrial agriculture model.
    Wait for fuel shortages or monocrop plaques to wipe out intire crops.
    Modern food isn't as nutritious either.
    Heirloom seeds and permaculture methods locally are sustainable and break away the slavery of food control.

  46. A D says:

    Usa…after death the pills

  47. A D says:

    In europe…no gmo allowed

  48. theuserprofile says:

    No mention of the labeling issue, nor GMO crops contaminating non-GMO plants.

  49. Eman Dospuntos says:

    They forgot about the bees, deforestation, bioacumulation, crosbreads with other species, its impact on ecosystems, the impact this has on farmers in countries like India… I know this is not meant to be a 3 hour documentary but these things should have been mentioned at least

  50. Neil Menezes says:

    This left me more confused than I was before? Are they or are they not harmful?

  51. Austinschmidy says:

    You found a great excuse to take a work trip to Maui 😉

  52. daisuke910 says:

    People don't seem to mind taking GM medicine but making lots if fuss with GM food. Also, corporation greed is the main problem here.

  53. Shay Hershku says:

    There is another subject that concern food: food lose. A big amont of foot is lose since it's produce.

  54. Michael Angelo Abrea Joson says:

    Gooo GMO

  55. Culturephile says:

    Glad You Asked?

    Glad I Watched.

  56. Projects Rewritten says:

    Momsanto is the devil!

  57. Soupinator says:

    I've always said that genetic modification isn't the problem, Monsanto is.

  58. martineo25 says:

    We don’t need to grow more food. What we need is to waste less and buy local whenever possible.

  59. Jimmy Arkthida says:

    It's already fixed looked up chemtrail infected

  60. Ankin Skywlker says:


  61. Cara Mazzola says:

    Really informative, thanks.

  62. champagnebleu says:

    I hate when they make ppl use voices they don't usually talk in

  63. Oliver Taltynov says:

    19:30 "… isn't that they're unsafe to eat." No health risks? Laughable, at least from scientific point of view

    (with exceptions like "scientists" working for Monsanto). Try to mention in next approach horizontal gene transfer.

    That resistence gene can go not only from the plant to some bacteria in soil, but (!) in intestines to natural

    intestine bacteria. Not saying it has to happen every time, but the possibility has to be topic for serious research. And after

    the experience with developing antibiotic resistance, it is foolish not expect similar process will go on with

    spreading of these resistance genes into/in nature.

  64. Alexander says:

    Im a fan of GMO if you use it correctly, I think I would have been nice if you talked about the fact that when plants reproduce the genes are carried on, so that means the GMO "farm crops" can mis with "wild crops" and the GMO gens get into nature and can have negative impacts.

  65. - - says:

    liberals keeps openin there big mouth 🗣 🙄👎🏼 making 🇺🇸sick again

  66. Gonzalo Barreto says:

    Another issue that wasn't discussed in the video was the diminishing biodiversity in our crops due to Genetic Modification. Having a single strain (version) of each crop throughout the world could cause widespread problems if there's a health issue associated with the GMO… just another thing to consider

  67. ilove2929 says:

    The aggressive fertilizer and pesti5 during the plantation and harvesting are the ones we should worry about.
    Thats when monsato name comes up

  68. Alice Hargest says:

    Think a lot less people would be worried about GMOs if they were actually the people potentially starving without food

  69. Alex Andersohn says:

    Should we worry about getting cancer? Maybe Vox can convince us about that too…

  70. Datz nunayabeeznus says:

    I'm curious why youtube partnered on this video with vox. I wonder if youtube owns stocks in gmo

  71. Mandu Rugas says:

    and who funded the scientific research organisations?

  72. Mandu Rugas says:

    and who funded the scientific research organisations?

  73. Keep Peace says:

    We so don't want GMO based food, it is unsafe to eat and science has conducted tests on rats that grow huge tumors on their bodies! We already decided GMO is unacceptable for human consumption and there is no further need to do videos like this. The answer is no.

  74. soccerjoker95 says:

    People need to understand that everything is GMO. Even people are GMO because the DNA from 2 different individuals are mixed together to create an offspring. There are also different types of mutations that come about naturally. Bees indirectly create new plants with the pollen they spread around. Certain foods in the past were not able to be consumed by humans but over the years and through selective breeding became part of our diets. To get better agricultural products, farmers over the years have taken the best crops and used them together to create an even better product, also with livestock. I believe almost nothing in nature stays the same and is constantly evolving "naturally." Modern science is just speeding up this process and being proactive by making crops resistant to pests.

  75. D. P. says:

    So if only 10% of crops produced using GMO is being used in food that is being consumed by human's, then I'm gonna go ahead and guess that 10% is Cheerios alone😬

  76. Monse Her says:

    Monsanto is in our soil. Don't eat GMO foods and highly processed foods.

  77. Pulkit Patel says:

    You didn't answer the main question 😠. Is it safe to consume GMOs

  78. Ari M says:

    Leading with "GMOs seem harmless" is maybe not the best move in an era of short attention spans. This would also be a great opportunity to bring up the toxic effects of pesticides on not only surrounding residences but also farm workers. And maybe staring a conversation about why buying organic has the moral incentive of not participating in a system that poisons underpaid and exploited workers as well as the earth. It's all a part of the same problem.

  79. Loren Chorley says:

    :Why didn't you talk about the 12% of scientists that don't think it's safe to eat GMOs? (7:37) You did yourself a serious disservice in not addressing their concerns

  80. memyselfandY21 says:

    The answer: yes, but actually no.

  81. spijkerpoes says:

    All these arguments pro and con presented here are beside the point.
    Famine is a political problem. No technical solution has ever solved those (besides the a-bomb)
    Many genes have multiple functions. The genome isn't a blueprint in which you can scribble, truth is we still don't understand it's language.
    Modern profit optimised agriculture with cultivars in monoculture has been devastating for the ecosystem. Gmo monoculture on dead soil with no connection to insect life (and the rest of the food chain) will be even worse. Infact it already is looking at US ecological dead countryside.

  82. darkside ofthehost says:

    Ask : Can you find true religion of god? can you prove it?

  83. Didact says:

    Bananas are genetically modified

  84. That Makes Sense To Me says:

    I learned something

  85. Dee B says:

    We've been eating GMO food for hundreds of years now. So, thats it.

  86. haileypaq says:

    @vox this is interesting but I'd like to see what your reporters and these studies defined GMOs as. While it might have a dictionary definition, it certainly means different things to different people in more recent times.

  87. ultraali453 says:

    You can't make something out of nothing. When you increase crop yield artificially, something has to give.

  88. pyRoy6 says:

    Not that I recommend increasing our population, but imagine how many people we could feed if we used GMO tech to grow more food for us to eat. Instead, we use it to make more money growing feed for animals that we then slaughter.

  89. Joseph Fuller says:

    Small world. That guy picked me up when I was hitchhiking around Maui and I helped a friend do yard work for that other Dr., or at least a guy that looked remarkably similar to the best of my memory.

  90. Augustus Day says:

    To save you some time: NO.

  91. Jonathan Lee says:

    Vox just solve the biggest question, the fridge light DOES turn off when closed! 3:01

  92. Astral'o Pithecus says:

    The problem is not danger and health risk. The problem is taste and the inherent culinary properties of such foods, which have decreased or been altered substantially since genetic engineering began. A red, round, resistant tomato that smells like fish and has a watery taste. Let's eat plain rice then and take a boatload of vitamins and supplements…

  93. Sarah Ahmed says:

    Great video but seriously drifts to less important issues perhaps could focus on one topic like monopoly and etc rather than singular unethical cases

  94. CVoice Official says:

    While it was an okay documentary, to say we don't have to worry about corn pesticide use because it's fed to cows makes no sense. If the cows are getting the herbicide issues, then that would just get passed on to us when we eat them, the herbicide doesn't magically go away. Additionally, a different documentary I saw interviewed a farmer who mentioned how the land is less useable due to these herbicides.

  95. ariyanto lim says:

    Before protesting GMO, we should ask how many life GMO has saved from starvation…

  96. Caleb Moore says:

    Indigenous people grew diverse array of variations of their foods they grew, to combat drought when needed, to combat disease when needed, ect. GMO have good intention, but we already have natural solutions.

  97. max campbell says:

    GNOs are not the problem Monstanto is

  98. Sean Manikus says:

    you just sat there and said they engineered corn to have a pesticide grown right in it and then at the same time said it's perfectly safe.. Yeah maybe eating pesticides in small amounts might not be harmful to humans short term, but what about after 30 years of eating said pesticide. Has there been any long-term studies like that?

  99. Chelsea Young says:

    The first GMO was the sweet potato 🍠🍠🍠 and it was created and farmed naturally thousands of years ago.
    The first lab created and commercialized GMO was the Flavr Savr Tomato. It was modified using the game natural method as the sweet potato 🤓

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *