Because food is essential to keeping humans alive, genetically modified organisms in foods have been studied extensively. Article 2 of the European Directive 2001/18/EC defines a genetically modified organism (GMO) as an organism (i.e. plants, animals or microorganisms) in which the genetic material (i.e. DNA) has been altered in a way that does not occurs in nature through mating and/or natural recombination. Furthermore, genetic modifications are prepared by adding genetic constructs that, when incorporated into the genome of plants or animals, create a GM event (resulting variety) (EFSA; Joint, FAO 2000). The global level of consumption of GMO foods is growing rapidly. For example, between 1996 and 2003, the area planted with GM crops increased from approximately 3 million to 70 million hectares globally (Marabelli R., 2005). However, risks related to the use of GMOs have been identified and focus on three main categories: whether genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food are harmful to health, the environment and the world economy. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay First and foremost, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) pose risks to human health. GMOs increase cancer rates and ultimately lead to death. According to Christou (2013), fumonisins, fungal toxins produced by Fusarium molds during the colonization of cereals, are toxic to humans, mainly causing liver and kidney failure, esophageal cancer and increased HIV transmission rates. (M. Buiatti, P. Christou and G. Pastore). Furthermore, genetically modified crops contain extraordinary pesticide residues, and the main component of some pesticides is glyphosate, a substance that stimulates breast cancer cells in humans. Several studies have shown that such a substance disrupts the endocrine system by eliminating a chemical that interferes with the hormonal system in mammals. According to a study published in the National Library of Medicine, these imbalances can lead to cancer and many diseases such as developmental disorders and birth defects. Glyphosate has also been linked to an increase in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma which is one of the causes leading to an increased risk of cancer (Hardell, L. 1999). Similarly, the US National Academy of Sciences concluded that pesticide residues in US foods could cause a high rate of premature and serious cancers over the next 75 years (National Research Council, 1996). DL-tryptophan supplements, produced by genetically modified bacteria, have been shown to cause death and disability (Love, LA, et al., 1993). Furthermore, genetically modified foods are considered one of the main causes of the malfunctioning of the immune system. According to Dr. Árpád Pusztai of the Rowett Research Institute in 1998, a rat, fed a GM food, suffered from a malfunction of its immune system (Pusztai 2001). Further research published in New Scientist at Purdue University demonstrated that releasing a transgenic fish into its habitat could lead to the extinction of its population (Somerville 2000). There is evidence that some food allergies are caused by eating genetically modified foods. Studies conducted by ASCIA (Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy Limited) in Australia and New Zealand have shown that food allergy affects 10% of children up to 1 year of age; between 4-8% of children up to 5 years old and approximately 2% of adults. Furthermore, iHospital admissions for severe allergic reactions (anaphylaxis) have doubled over the past decade in Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom. (ASCIA, 2018). Peanut and tree nut allergy is the most common reason for infants and young children to be allergic. Peanut allergy, which is common (3% of children), receives considerable attention and about 20% of cases may worsen with time. Likewise, cow's milk is also considered a common cause of food allergies, especially in infants. In Australia and New Zealand, approximately 2% (1 in 50) of children are allergic to dairy products, particularly cow's milk. Although children recover within 3-5 years, other people continue to suffer from cow's milk allergy for a long time (ASCIA, 2018). It is believed that allergenicity, caused directly by the new proteins or by their interaction with the original ones, creates a new allergen (Bertoni G, 2005). In this regard, Rowland IR (2002) states that “it is obviously advisable to avoid using plants containing known allergens, for example peanuts and Brazil nuts, as sources of genes for GM plants” (27). There are concerns that genetically modified foods could cause liver damage. After analyzing them under a microscope, the livers of mice fed soybeans showed altered gene expression and structural and functional changes (Karawya, 2016). Many of these changes reversed after the mice's diet was switched to non-GM soy, indicating that GM soy was the culprit (Malatesta, et al., 2002). Michael Antoniou, a molecular geneticist, concludes his research by saying that his findings “are not coincidental and must reflect some “insult” to the liver by GMO soy.” He goes on to conclude that, although the long-term consequences of the GM soy diet are unknown, it “may lead to liver damage and consequently general toxemia” (Smith, 2007). Furthermore, many studies have hypothesized that genetically modified foods are responsible for the development of infertility. Genetically modified foods could pose a potential reproductive hazard. It also affects endocrine metabolism, endometriosis (GAO, et al., 2014). Some evidence has shown that GM foods could be linked to infertility-related diseases (AA, Lanzone, A., & Goverde, A.J., 2013). Finally, an Austrian government study showed that mice fed GM corn (Bt and Roundup Ready) had fewer newborns and smaller children (Velimirov, A., Binter, C., & Zentek, J., 2008). Secondly, GMOs pose potential risks to the environment. GMOs have toxicity to plants and animals due to the use of chemical pesticides and herbicides. GMOs can be indirectly toxic to bees, butterflies and birds (Nicolopoulou-Stamati, et al., 2016). This is why the use of GM crops requires the provision of special facilities that at least limit the spread of seeds and pollen (Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2004). The widespread cultivation of GM crops has increased the use of herbicides such as glyphosate as more herbicides need to be used to kill nearby weeds. In Canada, herbicide sales increased 130% between 1994 and 2011 (Benbrook, 2016). As a result, the use of glyphosate has led to the increase and spread of “super weeds,” which can no longer be killed. For example, over the past 20 years 37 weed species have demonstrated technologically advanced resistance to the herbicide glyphosate (Rastogi, 2013). As Arcieri (2016) believes, the reproduction of genetically modified plants or animals has unpredictable effects on adjacent biodiversity. Genetic changes in plants can also create greater ecological changes. This means that there is a possibility that GMOs dotransform into weeds under agricultural conditions (Dale, 2002). Consequently, the reduction in the production of other plants translates into a significant loss of biodiversity and an increase in the use of chemical substances in agriculture (M. Buiatti, P. Christou and G. Pastore, 2013). Third, the impact of GMOs on the world economy is truly negative. The purpose behind initiating GMO technology in an agri-food industry is financial. Farmers hope that GM crops will help them get more benefits from the biotechnology industry. However, they are negatively affected. The experience of the United States, for example, shows that economic outcomes are inconsistent. The autonomy of non-GM farmers could be threatened by gene flow from fields planted with GM crops (Whittaker, 2005). For example, a field study conducted in Australia examined the transmission of herbicide tolerance from GM canola and found that the highest level of contamination in nearby fields was 0.07% (Rieger, et al., 2002) . This level of contamination is well below the 0.9% threshold set by the EU, the limit above which labeling is required. However, non-GM farmers have established a zero tolerance rule for GMOs and their autonomy could be compromised and financially compensated (Riegr, et al., 2002). GM crops are considered unattainable for most citizens in developing countries. Patent monopoly drives income differences specifically between developed and developing countries (Spier, 2005). Developing countries may be unwilling to have GM crop varieties due to fears of endangering their current and future export markets, and may also be unable to afford the infrastructure necessary to enable them to meet EU requirements on traceability and labeling (Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2004). Due to the enormous cost and time investment in developing GM products, patents are exploited to protect the rights of companies in terms of unacceptable profits. Unfortunately, there are economic concerns about the use of patents. Consumers fear that by filing for a patent on a new type of genetically modified plant, the price of seeds and crops could increase. In this case, farms, farmers and consumers in developing countries will not be able to afford these GM crop varieties (Lalitha, N., 2004). In this way, the gap between rich and poor nations will increase quite significantly. For example, in 1999, 12 companies, many of them funded by the US Department of Agriculture, had more than 25 patents to produce sterile or chemically dependent genetically modified seeds, while each year one million children die from nutritional deficiencies and others 350,000 become blind due to vitamin A deficiencies (Shrader-Frechette, 2005). Having patented crops is a challenge for non-GM farmers who are not free to plant whatever crops they want. Instead, they claim that their GM crops are the result of cross-pollination. To control the whole issue, biotech companies like Monsanto can insert a "suicide gene" into the modified plant. Thus, the plant can only be supported for one growing season and would result in the production of seeds that are unable to germinate (Strauss, 2009). The end result is that farmers would be forced to buy new seeds every year and this would be unaffordable. GMO labeling laws are the main concern of many countries that care about the protection of their citizens. More than 50 countries.