Are There Problems with Genetically Modified Foods? A Discussion on the Rise of Cancer in the US and Australia

Recently, there has been a great deal of discussion about genetically modified (GM) foods, with both supporters and opponents. This should ideally be a rational debate, but on the issue of GM foods, serious commercial interests are clearly involved, leading to extreme subjectivity.

The Ministry of Agriculture holds a completely one-sided attitude, insisting on the large-scale introduction of GM crops and even showing no intention of giving the public the right to choose. Such an attitude clearly violates the basic constitution, raising questions about where democracy lies. The state's importation of low-priced GM foods involves continuously sending money abroad, which comes from taxes paid by the people. While it is understandable that imports are needed due to insufficient domestic demand, completely denying the people the right to choose makes this behavior hard to accept.

Now, let's examine a key issue: are GM foods harmful? We do not know for certain at this moment, but the currently risk-minimizing approach should be to treat GM food with extreme caution. This means neither prohibiting those who voluntarily want to act as guinea pigs and believe it is safe to eat from doing so, nor forcing those who refuse to eat GM food to consume it. This is the most advantageous way to handle the situation.

There are now many claims stating that GM foods are harmless. Various so-called scientists and experts constantly emerge to speak out. However, regardless of how much verbose text or argumentation is presented, we must note that no amount of experts or words can replace real-world verification.

In the past, ExxonMobil, driven by economic interests and an irresponsible attitude, firmly refused to acknowledge the dangers of tetraethyl lead. The arguments and massive data they presented were no less than those used today to hype GM foods. After a 25-year legal battle, it was revealed that after the 1920s, 90% of the lead in the atmosphere was emitted by the United States. When tetraethyl lead was harming human health, the company's scientists argued that the impact of emissions was negligible or completely harmless. Their rhetoric is almost identical to that used today regarding GM foods.

Regarding consumption, some people initially claimed online that Americans do not eat GM foods themselves. Then, Americans came forward to clarify that Americans actually consume a large amount of GM food, it is just not labeled. Subsequent surveys confirmed this. Australia is similar; many people stepped forward to say that they have also been eating GM food for ten years with no issues, making the matter seem simple: look, eating GM food for so long has caused no problems.

Is it really no problem at all? Are their statements credible?

Let's look at a set of data:

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stated that in 2007, approximately 11.7 million Americans had a history of cancer. Forty years ago, the number of cancer patients was about 3 million. From 2001 to 2006, this number rose from 10 million to 11.4 million.

In 2010, the US identified 1,529,560 new cancer cases, meaning 4,190 new cases per day. Among new cases, there were 789,620 in men, with the top three being prostate cancer (28%), lung cancer (15%), and colorectal cancer (9%). In women, there were 739,940 cases, with the top three being breast cancer (28%), lung cancer (14%), and colorectal cancer (10%).

According to an Associated Press report in 2011, officials from the US Centers for Disease Control stated that the number of cancer patients in the US has increased sharply in recent years, with roughly one in twenty Americans now being a cancer patient.

Let's look at Australia's data. Note that Australia has a very high incidence of skin cancer due to local sunlight and environment, so the following data excludes skin cancer.

This data comes from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, which released a latest brief on the country's cancer incidence based on its cancer dataset and periodic reports.

In 2007, Australia recorded 108,368 new cancer cases (excluding basal cell and squamous cell carcinomas of the skin) and 39,884 cancer deaths. The most common cancer in men is prostate cancer, while in women it is breast cancer. To date, lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death in both men and women.

Regarding the growth of cancer in Australia: Researchers found that from 1982 to 2007, the number of new cancer cases diagnosed annually for both men and women continued to grow, which can be explained by population aging and numerical growth. From 1982 to the 1990s, the overall cancer incidence rate for women continued to increase, after which it maintained a relatively stable trend. From 1982 to 1994, the overall cancer incidence rate for men continued to increase, after which it decreased until the late 1990s, when it began to increase again.

Observation shows that after 1994, the incidence rate for men began to decline. Just as Australia boasted about starting to consume large amounts of GM food, cancer rates began to increase again.

To summarize the US and Australia: both countries consume large amounts of GM food, both experience continuously high rates of cancer, and both have high incidences of prostate cancer in men and breast cancer in women. Statistically, can we consider these to be correlated?

Even if we concede that there is no connection between them, is it not amusing to hear countries filled with cancer patients, with numbers growing rapidly each year, claim that eating GM food is harmless?