so how do you avoid it?

avoid processed foods. your body will thank you, anyway.

I'd be willing to bet that almost everyone in America consumes GMO's on a regular basis.

Over 80% of soybeans, corn, cottenseed oil, canola oil, and sugar beets (about half of US table sugar) are GMO's.

I don't think I'll worry too much until there is a scientific consensus that the food is harmful. The efficiency advances are part of what we need to combat global hunger.

There's also the issue of Monsanto seed patents. Wayward seeds end up on a non-Monsanto farmers land, whether by wind or bird or what have you, and suddenly that farmer has violated patent law. Then Monsanto sues them out of house and home. Literally. Ugly ugly stuff. So, I avoid GMO's at all costs, for potential health reasons and because the companies behind GMO's are nothing short of horrendous.

To avoid them, I buy from my local farmers and grow my own food from Southern Exposure Seed Exchange heirloom seeds. Oh, and have to agree with falnfenix - no processed stuff. I will agree that it's almost possible to avoid with soy products and anything with sugar added =/

@SoccerJo - I agree, not to mention that a lot of GMO's (like the failed GMO Russets) actually reduce the amount of herbicides, fungicides, and pesticides used on fields. GMO's haven't been proven harmful, chemical field sprays have (to humans and the environment).

Of course there's an exception to every rule, like the Round-Up Ready line of corn and soybeans, which actually enables spraying more herbicide.

Crops that will still grow when sprayed with RoundUp scare me. I agree local farms and staying away from processed foods is the way to go. Your body will thank you for it.
Rhetorical question: I wonder why our government doesn't require anything containing GMOs be marked on the foods we buy?

Hell yes I eat GMOs! Last year I helped plant and harvest GMOs too.

"The efficiency advances are part of what we need to combat global hunger." AMEN SoccerJo

I have no real worries about GMOs, for the reasons already stated. No real evidence that they are harmful, and I believe in the goals of there research - I work with a lot of people who do ag research funded by Monsanto and the questions they pursue will be vital on a planet with a growing population and a changing climate.

All huge corporations are going to be as unethical as they can be, pointing fingers at Monsanto for bullying family farms and not researching every other major corp that you buy from to make sure they don't do the same isn't really fair. These are legal issues working through the infancy of this science, things will progress.

@SoccerJo: That is not necessarily true. I recommend Raj Patel's Stuffed and Starved: The Hidden Battle for the World Food System. One takeaway from the book: scarcity of food, and therefore a need to more efficiently produce it, is not the issue. The issue is simply that too many people don't earn enough money to buy food that is already available. Raise wages, and people can buy more food. There's more to it, of course, but if we start with this basic idea, solutions will lead us on a different path than using GMOs.

Also, while I am concerned about the safety of GMOs, another concern is how their use affects the lives of farmers and local economies. Basically, GMOs and other technologies concentrate the control of agriculture into a few companies (such as Monsanto), to the detriment of farmers everywhere. The effect of a world food system controlled by biotech companies (as well as the IMF and the World Bank) puts famers in debt they can't get rid of, forces farmers to cultivate crops for export rather than for local consumption, and eventually drives them off the land they own.

Lots more to say, but in my view the trouble with GMOs that their use if enmeshed in a system that encourages monoculture, the creation of export economies, and general lack of control over what farmers produce and what we eat.

A tricky subject to navigate. On the one hand, we have been modifying plants for thousands of years - selectively breeding those which we deem to be superior, occasionally to the detriment of diversity (see the impending banana crisis). In this way, GMOs can be seen as a much faster selective breeding process. On the other hand, as @smoore and @dadchefted state, there is a worrying trend of modifying crops to withstand increased pesticides. I don't worry about the plants themselves, but the pesticides thrown in with them.

I guess this is another case of as our mother's said, all things in moderation...

I encourage everyone to read the following link from the USDA - it sheds some light on the rigorous testing that is conducted before new traits are approved strictly for sale in the United States. Most products are also approved by the regulatory agencies of many other countries.

http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?contentid=BiotechnologyFAQs.xml&navid=AGRICULTURE

Here is an admittedly very technical abstract that explains how RoundUp resistance works: http://www.jstor.org/pss/4495679

Yes, farmers pay more for genetically modified seeds, but the reason they pay more is that they get a good return on their investment. I feel confident saying that I understand GMO's, and I eat them without reservation.

@bakedleech - I agree that genetically modified crops are important for the fight against world hunger and crucial for crop efficiency. However, what about health effects as a result of the increased pesticides some GMOs are designed to withstand? If a consumer is concerned about such toxins and wants to avoid them, how can they without proper labeling?

I realize that I may unknowingly eat GMOs. And I'm not thrilled about it. So I try to eat local/organic/heirloom and stay away from processed food.

Nobody can guarantee that these are safe. The effects of eating GMOs may not be known for years or decades. Right now they may not be acutely toxic to eat. However, what about the build-up of toxins in our bodies over years? For instance, corn that's been engineered to contain the Bt toxin was approved by the FDA based on the word of Monsanto, who stated that the toxin breaks down/doesn't survive the digestive process. Well, recent studies have shown that it DOES survive & it doesn't break down and it builds up in the body.

Not surprised at all unfortunately. I think they've gone downhill- or maybe other stores have come uphill. I can find almost everything I need as far as organic, local, etc. at the regular grocery store now- and for a third the cost.

As for GMOs solving world hunger, this has been what we've been hearing for decades. So let's do it! Come on guys! I don't see world hunger improving. It seems like that was a scam to make people get on board with it and now these big companies aren't following through. Shocking.

Yes, I definitely think they should be labeled. I mean, why not? We are a consumer society that values choices - so how about giving us the choice? I prefer food without aspartame, for example, so I don't buy those. But other people don't care.

Those that feel GMOs are safe can eat them, and those that don't can stay away.

Hi, Libba Letton from Whole Foods Market here. Check out Monica Eng's follow-up Q&A on GMOs for more great info on this issue. She addresses whether there is evidence for stating GMOs are higher yield or offer "more efficient farming," among other things.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/tribnation/chi-a-qa-on-geneticallymodified-foods-20110525,0,4914034.story

Whole Foods Market, for the record, has supported mandatory labeling for almost two decades. Between organic products, our own 365 Everyday Value products, and products verified by the Non-GMO Project, 70% of the food in our stores is Non-GMO, and that number is growing every day.

These comments about fending of world hunger by plating GMo's is nuts! It could be a good idea to look up how much food we actually throw away-- It's not a food production issue in world hunger, it's a food distribution issue! Plus, there's plenty of proof positive about what pesticides and herbicides can do to the reproductive systems of otherwise healthy females.... The bigger picture is that we should all have the CHOICE to decide what we put in our bodies and not be powerless about it. If people would like to eat GMO's on a regular basis then be my guest but I think I'd prefer to know what's in my food and it should be labeled as such....

There is NO food shortage in America--there is food waste. "Forty to fifty per cent of all food ready for harvest never gets eaten." From here:
http://www.foodproductiondaily.com/Supply-Chain/Half-of-US-food-goes-to-waste

There is an unequal distribution of food throughout the world, and NO amount of GMO food will fix that. Further, it is irresponsible to continue to produce GMO food without SOLID, unequivocal evidence that it is safe.

@Soccerjo & ACharmer -

Recently I took a class with a focus on agriculture, and we examined GM crops from a number of angles; one thing that is very clear is that on average, crop losses due to pests and disease are NOT substantially lower for the high-chemical-input, GM crops than they are for other methods, including even organics. Pests adapt. Just like bacteria adapt to antibiotic use, weeds develop resistance to herbicides. The genetic modification, and the high chemical application it permits, is NOT what makes a significant difference in food yield.

The increase in food yield in this country came before genetic modification technology was developed. It was due in part to the use of synthetic fertilizers (which is another environmental issue in itself...) and in part thanks to good old-fashioned selective breeding of the healthiest and most productive parent plants.

Amen zoeford. If the USDA wants to climb into bed with Monsanto, the least they can do is label these foods as such so that those of us who care have the option to avoid GMOs.

How about all the sheep that died after grazing on bt cotton?

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/MDSGBTC.php

There is also evidence that pesticide use has destroyed quite a bit of the water supply in India as well. Seems to me this is adding to world hunger rather than stopping it.

Hi. I'm Monica Eng, the one who wrote the original article. I want to note that, to date, there are NO commercially used GMO seeds that boost yields or resist draught. GMO seeds in use only carry a pesticide inside them or resist Roundup. People reflexively assume this technology will feed the world but there has been no proof of this so far. And I agree with Patel and Maria Rodale that starvation is NOT about food shortages but rather bad distribution and low wages.

@SoccerJo and cosigners: myth! Do some research. Global hunger is not a result of insufficient production.