Artificial versus Natural Genetic Modification & Perils of GMOs

By Dr. Mae-Wan Ho, Institute of Science in Society; August 5, 2014

Genetics has been turned upside down beginning the mid-1970’s and especially since the human genome was announced in 2000. The tools of genetic manipulation have been advancing and improving in leaps and bounds. Today, geneticists can dissect and analyse the structure and function of genes and genomes in minute detail down to the base sequence of a nucleic acid in one single cell using ‘next generation deep sequencing’

What’s notably missing so far is any investigation on the trans-generational epigenetic effects of GMOs and glyphosate herbicides; and this glaring omission in risk assessment can no longer be ignored and swept aside.

But don’t wait for it. Take it upon yourselves to ban GMOs now, at individual and local community levels. It has failed and will fail again, being based on a reductionist, obsolete science. It is an agronomic disaster, and bad for climate change. Most of all, it is standing in the way of sustainable, biodiverse, climate friendly, non-GM agriculture that’s productive, resilient and health-promoting.

Source: Artificial versus Natural Genetic Modification & Perils of GMOs


For a more detailed, comprehensive discussion on this issue, see:

The New Genetics and Natural versus Artificial Genetic Modification,” by Dr. Mae-Wan Ho; Entropy, Vol. 15, Issue 11; November 4, 2013

From the Abstract:

The original rationale and impetus for artificial genetic modification was the “central dogma” of molecular biology that assumed DNA carries all the instructions for making an organism, which are transmitted via RNA to protein to biological function in linear causal chains. This is contrary to the reality of the “fluid genome” that has emerged since the mid-1970’s.

This entry was posted in Activism, Ban GMOs Now, Dr. Mae-Wan Ho, Gene Ecology (vs. Reductionist systems). Bookmark the permalink.