November 29, 2000

2 min read

Google Logo Add Us On GoogleAdd SciAm

Americans Open to GM Foods

By Kate Wong

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

When a consumer group reported in September that taco shells had been found to contain unapproved bioengineered corn, the announcement fanned the flames of the controversey that has surrounded genetically modified food since its inception. The corn, known as StarLink, had been bioengineered to resist pests. But because of a small risk of allergic reaction in humans, the corn was approved only for animal feed. Since then numerous companies involved with the taco shell manufacturing and distribution have recalled the products and removed the shells from stores. Yet despite the highly publicized reports, most Americans are not concerned about food safety, according to the results of a new study.

North Carolina State University sociologist and food scientist Tom Hoban surveyed 500 Americans to assess whether their attitudes toward genetically modified food had shifted in the wake of the StarLink incident. Although 53 percent had heard about the recall, no one reported avoiding any foods containing genetically modified ingredients. A mere 5 percent had taken action as a result of concerns over bioengineered foods, and many of these people just wanted more information. Moreover, 67 percent of those surveyed said they would purchase produce that had been genetically altered to resist pesticides or be more nutritious. For most people food spoilage and bacterial contamination were far more worrisome than genetic modification. "Biotechnology is simply not an issue of concern for the vast majority of U.S. consumers," Hoban concludes. "In fact, most U.S. consumers are looking forward to the benefits that biotechnology will provide in the future."

But the official jury is still out on the StarLink corn case. Following the September news reports, 44 people claimed that eating food that contained the corn made them sick-- incidents that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking into consideration. Depending on the recommendation of a panel of scientists appointed to evaluate StarLink safety, scheduled to be submitted on Friday, the EPA will decide whether or not to grant Starlink maker Aventis SA temporary clearance to use the product in human food. If they do not, the company could face huge liability claims.

Kate Wong is an award-winning science writer and senior editor for features at Scientific American, where she has focused on evolution, ecology, anthropology, archaeology, paleontology and animal behavior. She is fascinated by human origins, which she has covered for nearly 30 years. Recently she has become obsessed with birds. Her reporting has taken her to caves in France and Croatia that Neandertals once called home to the shores of Kenya’s Lake Turkana in search of the oldest stone tools in the world, as well as to Madagascar on an expedition to unearth ancient mammals and dinosaurs, the icy waters of Antarctica, where humpback whales feast on krill, and a “Big Day” race around the state of Connecticut to find as many bird species as possible in 24 hours. Wong is co-author, with Donald Johanson, of Lucy’s Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins. She holds a bachelor of science degree in biological anthropology and zoology from the University of Michigan. Follow her on Bluesky @katewong.bsky.social

More by Kate Wong

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe