John Phipps: The New Technology Helping Cool the GMO Debate

CRISPR results are identical to results of conventional breeding, and it’s nearly impossible to differentiate from conventional vs CRISPR. The breeding tool is also having an impact on the apprehension of GMOs.

The public apprehension over Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) has slowly dissipated as an abundance of non-GMO offerings have been made available to consumers. One major concern was the transference of genetic material between species.

These transgenic mutations made some consumers uneasy, but they also made GMOs detectable. Soon simple and rapid tests could make sure if corn was GMO or not. Such detectability is crucial.

Compare this situation to organic, for example, where the only criterion was essentially the word of the producer, backed by paperwork, inspections, and other oversight – not a laboratory test. Science has moved on.

Using a genetic engineering tool with the handy name of CRISPR/Cas9, breeders can now alter genes without using transgenic material. This is essentially the same method as conventional plant breeding only capable of targeting a specific gene segment instead of waiting for an identical natural mutation to occur and be sorted out.

CRISPR results are identical to results from conventional breeding. Without outside material involved it is impossible to differentiate from conventional and CRISPR results.

While food activists may still object, recent scandals in the organic food industry suggest trying to discriminate against CRISPR products will be impossible or at least worse than the current shaky organic verification regimes. It would also make no sense or calm any fear.

Gene alterations occur constantly from natural causes such as background radiation, gene replication errors, and traditional breeding, evidenced by the importance of pedigrees for breeding livestock.

When this genetic tool first began getting attention, I wrote about it in Top Producer. I was a little too enthusiastic six years ago about when the first fruits of this work would show up in supermarkets.

It is happening now, and one of the first foods to be improved is sadly, mustard greens. The new varieties are less bitter, I guess, but then I’m far from a salad aficionado.

My hope is we could finally solve some more pressing vegetable issues – like shippable tomatoes with August-garden juiciness and flavor. Meanwhile consumers may be, knowingly or not, storing one of the most advanced scientific discoveries in their refrigerators.

In other words, we’ll be putting CRISPR in the crisper.

The Packer logo (567x120)
Related Stories
The request allocates $10 billion to row and specialty crop producers for crops planted in 2026, with the remaining $1.1 billion designated for Florida farmers hit by winter storms in late 2025 and early 2026.
Following a record-breaking $3.8 billion year in retail sales, the U.S. Highbush Blueberry Council is looking to a pivotal July USDA referendum to sustain its massive market momentum and combat rising industry pressures.
Arizona researchers trial misting technology offering farmers “crop assurance” through app-controlled temperature and humidity management.
Read Next
Grounded in a millennia-old legacy of Indigenous stewardship and unique regional pride, Maine’s native lowbush barrens face a turning point as local growers battle climate whiplash and infrastructure shortages to ensure this irreplaceable crop remains a thriving, working landscape.
Get Daily News
GET MARKET ALERTS
Get News & Markets App