The intricate debate over genetically modified organisms (GMOs) involves powerful economic interests, as well as ethical, legal, emotional and scientific aspects, some of which are dealt with in this paper. (It is possible to identify two main groups of scientists across the GMOs divide: the triumphalist and the critical group.) Scientists in the triumphalist group state that GMOs and their derivatives are safe for the environment and do not offer health hazards any more than similar, non-genetically modified, products. This view is disputed by the critical scientists, who are prompted by the scarcity of studies on the environmental impacts and toxicity of GMOs, and who point out flaws in tests performed by the same companies which hold the patents. They are also critical of the current state of the process of gene transference, lacking accuracy, a fact which, coupled with the scant knowledge available about 97% of the genome functions, may produce unforeseeable effects with risks for the environment and public health yet to be assessed. Examples of such effects are: the transference of alien genes [??] to other species, the emergence of toxins, the creation of new viruses, the impacts on beneficial insects and on biodiversity in general.
transgenics; GMOs; genetic engineering; GMOs hazards; biotechnology; transgenic plants