Learn how to

A diverse range of influential people are entering the GM debate, strongly opposing the use of genetically modified crops as a potential solution to world food shortages.

Prince Charles, organic agriculture advocate, has nominated the mass development of genetically modified crops as the world’s worst environmental disaster, and says multi-national companies trialling gene manipulation are engaging in a “gigantic experiment with nature and the whole of humanity which I think has gone seriously wrong”. And he mentioned the effects of hybrid crops of Australia as a worst-case-scenario in particular.

“Western Australia has huge salinisation problems which have come from some of the excessive approaches to modern forms of agriculture.”

His comments have been nominated his most outspoken intervention on the issue of GM food so far, with the Prince expressing fear that - far from being a solution to world hunger - food would in fact run out due to the damage on the earth’s soil by scientists’ research. He said in the future relying on “gigantic corporations” for food, would result in “absolute disaster”.

“We have gone working against nature for too long… this is a classic way of ensuring there is no food in the future” he said, noting focusing on food security was not the same as focusing on food production. He also referenced India as one example where premature action on GM had created environmental havoc.

“I have been to the Punjab where you have seen the disasters that have taken place as result of the over demand on irrigation because of the hybrid seeds and grains that have been produced which demand huge amounts of water. [The] water table has disappeared. They have huge problems with water level, with pesticide problems, and complications which are now coming home to roost.”

His comments come as Australia begins harvesting GM Canola crops. Farmers in Australia have also adopted rapidly GM cotton, which ABARE estimates now accounts for more than 90per cent of total land dedicated for cotton crops. The commercial growth of genetically modified carnations is also permitted. ABARE notes over the long term, other broadacre GM crops may be up for adoption by Australian farmers, with their own quantitative assessment focused on canola, soy bean, maize, wheat and rice.

However the uptake of GM is not something Australian consumers and the food industry seem particularly pleased about. Australian chefs have become strong anti-GM campaigners. Over 150 of the nation’s top chefs have signed a food labelling petition expressing their opposition to serving GM goods in restaurants.

More recently, leading Australian chefs Tobie Puttock and Dur-é Dara have joined nutritionist Dr Rosemary Stanton and Greenpeace in launching another national petition – “Our right to know” – demanding more comprehensive labelling and testing of GM food products.

“We have no idea about the long-term health impacts of GE food because appropriate tests have generally not been done and the products have not been labelled. The lack of labelling concerns me,” says Dr Stanton.

The Biological Farmers of Australia also is concerned about lax GM labelling laws which currently do not extend to highly refined GM food products, and will allow oil from GM canola to be used in subsequent products without identification.

Dr. Maarten Stapper, Australian soil health expert and former CSIRO scientist, says the environmental problems inherent in GM crops could damage agricultural environments. “Genes don’t fix soils degraded by modern farming – isolated genes are but a small part in highly complex production systems” says Mr. Stapper. “We need to regenerate our soils by increasing soil organic carbon and re-activate soil biology to achieve sustainable farming, enhancing internal plant resistance to insects and diseases.

“Focus should be on productive and resilient biological-organic agriculture for healthy soils, the production of mineral rich food and a regenerated landscape that demonstrates biodiversity and clean water and air. Commercial GM would likely be introduced at the expense of soil health.”

Choose better personal products. Just because a label says ‘natural’ doesn’t mean it’s kidsafe.

Eat fresh plant-based foods. Opt for organic fruits and vegies.  Choose milk and meat without added growth hormones. Limit canned food and infant formula, as can linings may contain bisphenol A (BPA).

Pick plastics carefully.  Some plastics contain BPA, which is linked to cancer. Avoid clear, hard plastic bottles and choose baby bottles made from glass or BPA-free plastic. Don’t microwave plastic containers.

Filter your tap water. Use a reverse osmosis system or carbon filter to reduce your family’s exposure to impurities in water. Mix infant formula with fluoride-free water.

Wash little hands. Frequent hand washing reduces kids’ exposure to chemicals. Skip anti-bacterial soaps, since they can contain pesticides that are absorbed through the skin.

Skip non-stick. When overheated, non-stick cookware can emit toxic fumes. Cook with cast iron or stainless steel instead.

Use a HEPA-filter vacuum.  Kids spend lots of time on the floor and household dust contains contaminants. HEPA-filter vacuums capture the widest range of particles and get rid of allergens. Leave your shoes at the door for obvious reasons.

Times are a changing, and the green movement has taken hold throughout most of the country. People are recycling, buying more environmentally friendly cars, re-using shopping bags, and eating organic. To some, this great switch to sustainable living could cause some frustration, as not all stores offer organic.  Hunting down hormone-free, organic milk may take a chunk out of your schedule. Not to fret, my eco-conscious friend!

There is a great website by the Environmental Working Group - www.EWG.org that examines the least and most toxic fruits and vegetables, helping you decide how organic you can afford to go. Of course, the more hormone-free, non-toxic you can be for you and your family - the better!

Let’s start with what you should absolutely buy organic because they are the MOST toxic. In order of toxicity: peaches (absolute most), apples, sweet bell peppers, celery, nectarines, strawberries, cherries, lettuce, grapes, and pears. The problem lies in their sweet, juicy, thin skin that enables pesticides and herbicides to absorb right in to the body. Even if you peel your skins, the fruit/vegetable itself holds many nasty chemicals you don’t need.

The next list is the top 10 LEAST toxic fruits/vegetables and is probably okay to buy non-organic. In order of low-level toxicity: onion (absolute least), avocado, sweet corn (non-GMO), pineapple, mangoes, sweet peas, asparagus, kiwi, bananas, and cabbage.

Do you see the pattern? These foods don’t have thin, juicy skins; they tend to have tougher outsides that are peeled and therefore difficult to penetrate by a chemical. Even the difference between lettuce (which is more toxic) and cabbage (least toxic) lies in the stiffness of their leaves. Cabbage leaves are much more firm and difficult for chemicals to absorb into.

Please consider these lists when you are out shopping and doing your part to support your family’s health. If your neighborhood stores don’t carry organic, look to farmer’s markets and buy local!

Over the last year, you may have heard about the forced introduction of genetically engineered sugar beets into the food supply in 2008. The health and environmental effects of these crops are relatively unknown and have historically resulted in an increase in pesticide use.

Most of the mainstream table sugar, cereal and candy companies have refused to ban genetically engineered sugar in their products, including American Crystal and Kelloggs. Here are two tips to help consumers: