How often do we consider that the food currently on our plates was the product of rigorous genetic and scientific experimentation? The food is, in a sense, designer. We could be consuming food that was designed, selected, and tested to perfection in the same way that any other product made available to us is. Typically, eating ‘natural’ ingredients implies eating freshly grown food from farmer’s markets or ‘organic’ producers. Consuming ‘fresh’ food is marketed throughout the University of Virginia’s dining halls – but is the food that we consume truly organic, or is it a designer product? 

Genetically Modified Organisms (or GMOs) are defined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture as “an animal, plant, or microbe whose DNA has been altered using genetic engineering techniques” [1]. For thousands of years, human beings have utilized selective breeding methods to select for particular phenotypes, so in a sense we have been genetically modifying for thousands of years already [2]. For example, the reason that bananas are yellow is due to genetic modification through years of artificial selection; initially bananas were green and red. Recently, selective breeding has been augmented by modern biotechnology which grants scientists the capability to directly modify the genetic code. Both the crops and animals that produce the food purchased in our local groceries stores – subsequently served in school meals – potentially bear the signature of purposeful genetic adaptation. 

Genetic alteration has allowed for massive advancement in food production, helping increase yields and production of food within the confines of the agricultural space currently available to us. For instance, many genetically modified plants resistant to herbicides allow for greater yields of crops. This is an important innovation, especially with a growing population and already present issues with food insecurity. In the United States, 10.2% of households are food-insecure, 6.4% are households with low food security, and 3.8% of households have very low food security [3]. Genetically Modified Organisms provide a solution that takes us one step closer towards ending food insecurity, as well as provides a potential and feasible solution to solving world hunger. 

Despite the benefits, there are still fears and trepidation as people question the safety of genetically modified food. There are legitimate concerns of the potential allergenic properties of genetically modified organisms, as well as the transfer effects of antibiotic resistance whereby modified organisms could pass resistance to bacteria. Ultimately, there are potentially negative consequences for human health that “could result from differences in nutritional content, allergic response, or undesired side effects such as toxicity, organ damage, or gene transfer” [4]. Many of these fears can be quelled by current science which affirms that genetically modified organisms are safe. However, genetically modified organisms, specifically those that are experimentally-derived, have not been incorporated into diets for long enough to have complete certainty as to potential ramifications on health in the future. Furthermore, many laws and regulations which are designed to govern the world of biotechnology are too archaic and outdated to successfully monitor and control the safety of the food being manufactured. There is a desire and push for greater research and labeling to present the dangers of genetically modified foods to consumers when they are purchasing food in grocery stores. Providing people with that information, I will argue later, is incumbent upon the manufacturer, the Food and Drug Administrator, grocery stores, food distributors, and retailers who utilize those genetic technologies.

The dining halls of the University of Virginia have monopolized the food market filled with students of all years, majors, and dietary preferences without providing full transparency. At the University of Virginia, first-year students are required and expected to purchase an ‘all inclusive dining plan,’ which includes unlimited swipes into dining halls each day. This plan is incredibly expensive and, because first-years are also not allowed to have cars on grounds and are therefore unable to drive to grocery stores, they are left without the option to dine elsewhere. This leaves them without the option to choose whether or not they would like to eat in the dining hall because it is essentially the only on-campus dining option. Thus, the University has effectively monopolized the market and ended any notion of “choice” that students may have in food choice when living on grounds their first-year. 

Nutritional information about the meals being served in the dining halls is available, but there is no information provided as to whether the foods are genetically modified or not. This prevents students from making informed decisions about whether or not they would like to eat genetically modified food. If a student is vegetarian and does not want to eat meat, they are provided with the information necessary to eat within that chosen dietary preference. While if a student did not want to eat genetically modified food, that information is not given to them in order to make an informed decision about the food they would like to consume. In public health, it is a common tactic when approaching issues with food or dietary habits to treat “food as medicine” [5]. Treating food as medicine and viewing people as patients, one can consider the ethical implications of not providing information to students as they make uninformed decisions about what food they would like to eat. 

When treating food as medicine and those who eat in dining halls as patients, lack of informed consent is clearly displayed. If a patient is involuntarily given a medicine, the patient is assumed to have the right to choose treatment – and if that is not given, then the patient will be informed of the implications of the treatment being received [6]. These are basic tenets of informed consent and are not made available to the ‘patients’ in the case of the dining hall, as students are not fully informed of the nature and background of the food being made available to them. 

This is an issue of transparency – UVA Dine (University of Virginia’s dining hall company) has an ethical obligation to inform students if they do not provide them with a choice. The UVA Dine’s website provides no information as to whether or not genetically modified organisms are used [7]. UVA’s distributors include 4PFoods which is a certified organic producer, which means they can’t use any synthetic pesticides, chemical fertilizers or GMOs [8]. However, other distributors like  Produce Source Partners and Cavalier Produce have no information regarding their use of  genetically modified organisms in their food on their websites [9,10]. Students are owed transparency and greater information regarding the use of genetically modified food in order for them to make informed dietary decisions. Furthermore, in the situation in which you treat food as medicine, you are not providing students with the information allowing for informed consent. UVA Dine is not upholding its ethical obligation to inform. 

I believe that Genetically Modified Organisms should be utilized in dining halls, but information and transparency must be given. Through a utilitarian perspective, genetically modified foods allow for the great amount of healthy food to be offered at a low price. The dining halls would advertise themselves as organic, if they were not using genetically modified organisms [11, 12]. UVA Dine says that they prioritize organic food, but this does not mean that all of their food is organic. I believe that in a situation like this, in which students are devoid of choice, they must be given all relevant information. Having a lack of information and choice creates a situation in which students who dine at UVA are unable to make meaningful informed decisions. Genetically Modified foods have a valuable role to play in the fight against world hunger and food insecurity, but they must come with warnings and transparency––people have a right to know. 

Sources: 

  1. “Agricultural Biotechnology Glossary.” USDA, https://www.usda.gov/topics/biotechnology/biotechnology-glossary. 

  2. “Genetically Modified Organisms.” National Geographic Society, https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/genetically-modified-organisms. 

  3. “Key Statistics & Graphics.” USDA ERS - Key Statistics & Graphics, https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-u-s/key-statistics-graphics/. 

  4. SITNFlash. “Will Gmos Hurt My Body? the Public's Concerns and How Scientists Have Addressed Them.” Science in the News, 17 Jan. 2021, https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/will-gmos-hurt-my-body/#:~:text=One%20specific%20concern%20is%20the,organ%20damage%2C%20or%20gene%20transfer 

  5. Graber, Eric. “Food as Medicine.” American Society for Nutrition, 24 Feb. 2022, https://nutrition.org/food-as-medicine/ 

  6. Keatley, K L. “Controversy over genetically modified organisms: the governing laws and regulations.” Quality assurance (San Diego, Calif.) vol. 8,1 (2000): 33-6. doi:10.1080/105294100753209174 

  7. Davies, Benjamin. “Responsibility and the limits of patient choice.” Bioethics vol. 34,5 (2020): 459-466. doi:10.1111/bioe.12693 

  8. “What We Are Doing On Grounds.” UVA Dine, https://virginia.campusdish.com/en/Sustainability/WhatWeAreDoing#:~:text=When%20local%20items%20are%20used,ingredients%20to%20our%20dining%20locations.

  9. https://4pfoods.com/posts/what-do-all-those-labels-stand-for/#:~:text=At%204P%20Foods%20we%20get,%2C%20antibiotics%2C%20chemicals%20or%20vaccines

  10.  “Read Food Labels like A pro: What You Need to Know.” 4P Foods, https://4pfoods.com/posts/what-do-all-those-labels-stand-for/#:~:text=At%204P%20Foods%20we%20get,%2C%20antibiotics%2C%20chemicals%20or%20vaccines.  

  11. “Cavalier Produce.” Cavalier Produce, https://www.cavalierproduce.com/.  

  12. McEvoy, Posted by Miles. “Organic 101: Can Gmos Be Used in Organic Products?” USDA, 21 Feb. 2017, https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2013/05/17/organic-101-can-gmos-be-used-organic-products#:~:text=The%20use%20of%20genetic%20engineering,t%20use%20any%20GMO%20ingredients.  

Comment