Genetically Modified Corn

Larry A. Law

A major dispute has been brewing between Mexico and the United States. I'm not talking about open border concerns and efforts to stop illegal immigrants crossing from Mexico into the US. This dispute has to do with Mexico's efforts to stop genetically modified (GM) corn crossing from the US into Mexico. This effort has triggered a trade dispute between the US, Canada, and Mexico. The key question is whether GM corn poses a threat to human health. US and Canadian trade representatives argue it does not and want to force GM corn into Mexico. Given that GM seed is used in 90% of US crops, the dispute could have long-lasting effects on whoever loses. 

Biotechnology

Mexico issued a presidential decree in February 2023 that bans GM corn in tortillas and dough. They intend to gradually replace all GM corn in all animal and human foods. Mexico has kept GM corn from being grown within its borders for 25 years to protect ancient strains of maize and to ensure the health of their citizens. Corn is a staple crop eaten in 89% of Mexican meals. 

United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA)

The disagreement was in the hands of a three-member trade panel. Arguments for and against were solicited and a final decision was issued on December 20, 2024 in favor of the Biden Administration and the United States to force Mexico to take our GM corn. Mexico is appealing the decision.

Mexican Case Against GM Corn

GM corn is tightly married to glyphosate. Glyphosate is the main ingredient in Roundup. Monsanto is owned by Bayer (a German firm) and calls the corn that is resistant to glyphosate, Roundup Ready. Roundup can be sprayed on the fields growing Roundup Ready corn and it won't damage the corn, but it will kill all the weeds. Mexico's report contained 74 studies documenting the risk of glyphosate and the amount of residue found on GM corn (a problem given the amount of corn Mexicans eat in their meals). A 2014 study published in the Journal of Organic Systems looked at 2 decades of information showing rising rates of chronic deseases with glyphosate usage. The study found significant correlations between glyphosate and hypertension, stroke, diabetes, obesity, Alzheimer's, autism, multiple sclerosis, several types of cancer, and inflammatory bowel disease. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate in 2015 as "probably carcinogenic to humans" and courts in California have awarded significant damages for cancer injury to plaintiffs who have sued Monsanto.

Fernando Bejarano, executive director of Pesticide Action Network in Mexico, stated that the rejection of this proposal by the United States gives Mexico reason to doubt that America will acknowledge the potential risks posed by glyphosate and GM corn. Mexico has correctly decided that it is better to prevent problems with glyphosate than to take irresponsible risks, he said. This is the opposite tactic pursued by the United States, which relies on proof of harm after the fact.

US/Canadian Case For GM Corn

The US insists that GM corn is safe and effective (sounds like the same thing they said about the COVID-19 vaccine!). Testing is not conducted by regulatory agencies in the US. It is assumed that GM is equivalent to natural food (somehow it is unique enough to get a patent, but still equivalent to non-GMO corn?). Their mantra is: If there are no harms seen, then is must be safe. If the biotechnology corporations want to do testing, it is optional according to the FDA. They are turning a blind eye toward the issue and claiming ignorance concerning what happens down on the farm when the fox guards the hen house!

Europe, Mexico, and other countries take a safety-first stance. They want to see long-term studies demonstrating that this type of food is safe to eat BEFORE they give it to their citizens. The US feels that is overkill and waits to see problems arise before taking action. Unfortunately, many of these diseases take years to evolve and it is difficult to relate them back to initiation of disease processes begun so long ago. This is why specific tests with placebo groups are necessary, but the US has been more interested in safeguarding its technology and investment than in guaranteeing the health of its citizens. 

Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), whose state grows a lot of GM corn, tweeted that Mexico's ban is unscientific and that if the experts need proof that GM corn is safe, they can look at him as a case study, because he has eaten GMOs for 30 years. Hmmm, that sounds really scientific! But this represents the logic in a system intent on protecting its investment. 

I hate to have to say it, but I'm rooting for Mexico over the United States in this case! Stay tuned! If you want to see more on GMOs, see chapter 4 in my book There's An Elephant in the Room-Exposing Hidden Truths in the Science of Health.