As far as I know, there are no well documented cases of GM foods causing any diseases other than hysteria in GM opponents.

Dr. Isaac;

My question is, what are the types and methods of genetically modifying the food that might effect the memory and cause more consequences such as nerve damage. 

If you have any information please dont hesitate I need to know. 

Thank you;

Best Regards.

As far as I know, there are no well documented cases of GM foods causing any diseases other than hysteria in GM opponents.

No logical/scientific reason is apparent (to me) as to why GM food should affect memory or intellectual ability more than non-GM food. Either way, individuals will forget things or act stupidly. Scientists do go through the motions of thinking about looking for toxicological and allergenicity problems, for instance (see attached file); but my policy is to forget about the origin of what I'm eating and, rather, concentrate on enjoying my supper. What will eventually kill many humans is, directly or indirectly, the consequences of over-population, not GM food.

there are no well documented cases of GM foods causing any diseases clearly. 

Thank you for providing me by this article, I will surely read it if God wills.

But logically, the DNA of the human nature is built on specific criteria that is compatible by the natural DNA of the plants and other edible organisms, when the Edible organisms and plants DNA is modified and changed this will change the DNA of the humans, because by nature they are built to suit one another so changing the edible part will change our DNA which will cause new unknown diseases and problems, this sounds very logical.

Fatima. There is no "natural DNA". The wrongly named "junk DNA" in nearly every eukaryote harbors latent retroviral DNA. These viruses have been inserting themselves into genomes through the eons. 

That includes plants, animals and humans. They have been "genetically modified" by nature.

So every time you eat, you are consuming plant/animal DNA that contains "foreign" retroviral DNA. Yet, to my knowledge, there are no well documented cases of humans getting animal or plant retroviruses by eating them.

I agree with you there is no natural DNA, at the end of the day each person have a different DNA structure, but the process and way the RNA and DNA is built becomes effected by genetically modified foods which promotes cancer development and many other disease, some experiments done on rats prove that healthy normal rats were not suffering from any diseases until they have been consuming different types of genetically modiefied foods for a specific period of time and they were monitored which showed after a period of time that they started developing wierd and rare diseases, so there is an evidence. But the matter is that more studies have to be done in this field

Food entering the digestive system is processed and decomposed into basic substances for use. There is a lot of research on GM's safety, there are still doubts and fears. Links that can help:

http://www.who.int/foodsafety/areas_work/food-technology/faq-genetically-modified-food/en/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18989835

Dear Dr;

I have certain speculations in regards to what the WHO or FDA authorize for many reasons, I believe more in longitudinal scientific experiments with obeserved results rather than theories or un-complete proofs. If you have an article that proves the safety of GM foods by placing healthy people or rats that used to eat organic food for their whole life and then under the conditions of a  longitudinal study they were placed to just consume GM foods for several years and the safety was recorded without bais and with pictures, Id be really appreciating; otherwise if no similar studies exist then the claim that GM foods are safe is a myth.

"...but the process and way the RNA and DNA is built becomes effected by genetically modified foods which promotes cancer development and many other disease...."

Sorry Fatima, but this statement makes no sense, scientifically or otherwise.

If you have any peer-reviewed scientific articles to back this up, then please post them.

.........Or are all scientists, WHO, the FDA, USDA and global Health Ministries all part of some diabolical plot to fool the world into thinking that GM foods are safe?  

https://www.google.com.lb/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.responsibletechnology.org/docs/145.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwiNyYTb_5PTAhVD6RQKHSBjCcgQFggtMAU&usg=AFQjCNEI7ipAkJzTGTq50KsDweJX2qW-Zw 

Here is what you asked for Dr., im sure what I said will make a complete sense for you after reading this. Im not making those things up, they already exist; but maybe thete are different theories or schools regarding this matter. It might trigger you to add for your beautiful work and knoweldge to conduct a study in this area to prove it or disapprove it. And Ill be waiting the results to get a chance and see your work.

In regards to the FDA an WHO, I said I have some speculations, focus on "some", & these speculations didnt appear out of bizzare ,we all know also that they made some mistakes, for example from in my field, FDA autherized some slimming medications; and after couple of years they discovered that it causes nerve damage, then they cancelled it; for me this is a huge mistake; studies on medicational side effects and safety must take many years until they authorize a medicine; I have no doubt they already do this for thousands of their medication inorder to authorize it; but we humans are placing our health between their hands. And the list goes on you can check them online.

https://www.google.com.lb/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/glyphosate/NancySwanson.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwj9p4bAg5TTAhVJUhQKHQPeBwoQFggdMAA&usg=AFQjCNHiiiVh-eUlbvjWH0fP9S-OmV-QuA

https://www.google.com.lb/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.oregon.gov/Pharmacy/Imports/Marijuana/Public/DeathsFromMarijuanaV17FDAdrugs.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjlkfTehZTTAhXLaRQKHTwNChwQFggYMAA&usg=AFQjCNFZKTnVTg8k7llw1uqoFhO5wShAjw

Fatima, you obviously don't know what a "peer-reviewed scientific article" is.

Anybody can post drivel on the net "proving" the existence of Bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster, ancient aliens, UFO abduction, etc, etc..

Peer-review is when scientists submit their findings to a scientific journal. Their findings are analyzed by other scientists that either accept or reject them. Accepted findings are published in scientific journal.

Google Scholar is an excellent source to search for many peer-reviewed articles.

Check it out:

 https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_vis=1&q=genetically+modified+food&hl=en&as_sdt=1,21

I already work in research and the peer reviewed articles are one of the first things we learn to use to support our work, I provided you in regards to the FDA by an evidence from a govermental source which usually researchers refer to such sites because they are accredited.

But since you are insisting, enjoy reading these peer-reviewed beautiful articles,

https://www.organic-systems.org/journal/92/JOS_Volume-9_Number-2_Nov_2014-Swanson-et-al.pdf

http://file.scirp.org/pdf/FNS_2013072516034975.pdf

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408390701855993?scroll=top&needAccess=true

But as I told you a certain method must be done to get to prove or disapprove one of these claims, if a study done in the method I mentioned above with more explanation am sure it will give a highly trusted results. I read both regards the safety and the toxicity of GM, but there is no smoke without fire, why is there several claims about toxicity if it doesnt occur at all, these scientists worked for years to prove toxicity we cant disclaimer their work otherwise a strong evidence is developed. 

Thank you, I enjoyed reading  these peer-reviewed beautiful articles, but they do not support your previous claim:

"...but the process and way the RNA and DNA is built becomes effected by genetically modified foods which promotes cancer development and many other disease...."

Please post any peer-reviewed beautiful articles that support your claim.  

The herbicide glyphosate was introduced in 1974 and its use is accelerating with the advent of herbicide-tolerant genetically engineered (GE) crops. Evidence is mounting that glyphosate interferes with many metabolic processes in plants and animals and glyphosate residues have been detected in both.Glyphosate disrupts the endocrine system and the balance of gut bacteria, it damages DNA and is a driver of mutations that lead to cancer. (Nancy L. Swanson, Journal of Organic Systems, 9(2), 2014). The concept is the same but the words I used are different.  part of the the process in gm engneering is done to place substances such as glyphosate inorder the plant can become  stronger and less resitant to these substances which are cancerous causing mutations as mentioned above, and regarding more explanation about the phrase you put above 3 professors I met including a scholar mentioned this point. I wish from you to focus on the concept since I mentioned in the GM process and now I elaborated it.

And I tell you, I wait studies to prove the opposite, no one feels happy about being fed cancer causing food, so removing this burden is a humanity act

Nice rant, but you still haven't shown any peer-reviewed papers to support your previous claim:

"...but the process and way the RNA and DNA is built becomes effected by genetically modified foods which promotes cancer development and many other disease...."

I think this claim is absurd and demonstrates a total lack of understanding biochemistry.

I'll make this easy for you. Please mark "X" in the brackets so we both know where this discussion is headed:

( )  I have no peer-reviewed evidence for my previous claim.

( )  I will rant off-topic to avoid my previous claim.

( )  I acknowledge that my previous claim is wrong.

( )  I will post peer-reviewed papers that support my claim.

i explained the claim above. Read it until you get it & its taken from a peer-reviewed article; plus its not my claim its what several international professors taught me. Each scientist have their theories, if it doesnt match yours it doesnt mean its wrong. And if you are so sure of your claims you already stated them, what I can tell you if you didnt take into concideration what I stated above that defenitly there is a lack of research in this particular field until more researches are done then you can prove or disapprove this claim of many important professors, another point im a nutritionist and food scientist and not a biochemist, but this is an integrative research that should cover biochemistry, nutrition and I already said whats enough.Regards

Sorry, I didn't make any claims. You made this absurd claim

"...but the process and way the RNA and DNA is built becomes effected by genetically modified foods which promotes cancer development and many other disease...."

and I challenged you to back it up. But you can't find any supporting peer-reviewed evidence for it.

That's OK. You are entitled to have your own opinions, but you are not entitled to have your own facts. The facts are that you are wrong.

Its a shame that they don't teach basic biochemistry at your school.

Anyway, I'm done here. Debating anti GM zealots about biochemical facts is as futile as debating Bible fundamentalists about evolution.

You people have locked up your minds and thrown the key away.

Have a nice life.

 I was thinking the same in your regards, nice way of speaking is either part of a character or not.  

Have a good day

Regards

Very interesting question! I think it affects and how I could not answer! Why? I first need to know what kind of food is genetically modified, what her metabolism, good and bad qualities before genetic engineering! Then make a study and to what extent should take that food and see its effect on the entire body, especially the brain! Then it could be possible quantitative and qualitative try to answer to this very complex but very curious in question! I'm happy to follow this study eventual discussion and if I feel the need I will gladly participate in it!

thank you for your interest, its a dream study to do for me but Im looking for the proper methods, staff, equipments & advisors. Im sure if its conducted in the proper way it will be revolutionary in the GME.

I totally support your ideas in this interesting project, which I will be happy to follow!

Regards

Jasenko

 I have recently found that liver cancer (hepatocellular carcinoma; HCC) is induced by the co-infection of HIV-1 and HCV (please see files; HepG2 Fucoidan and The Fascio effect).

Further, I have recently found that hydrophobic membrane receptors related to CNS have been up-regulated in the liver cancer (HCC; please see file; The Fascio effect).

Furthermore, I have recently found that growth-hormone-related proteins are very dangerous and answered in this ResearchGate.

Fetal normal Hc, healed HepG2 (with fucoidan), and liver tissue of pseudo cancer have no such proteins.

LC tissue (No.6) has Insulin-degrading enzyme/Insulinase/IDE at 4.0 μg/mg tissue protein and Growth hormone-releasing hormone receptor/GRFR/GHRH receptor at 3.3 μg/mg tissue protein (total 7.3 μg/mg tissue protein).

Hepatoma HepG2 (without fucoidan) has GRB2-associated-binding protein 1/Growth factor receptor bound protein 2-associated protein 1 at 1.2 μg/mg cell protein and Insulin receptor substrate 2/IRS-2 at 15.0 μg/mg cell protein (total 16.2 μg/mg cell protein).

HCC tissue (with PBC) has Growth hormone receptor/GH receptor at 12.4, Insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 5/IBP-5 at 3.0, and Insulin-like growth factor binding-protein 3/IBP-3 at 0.7 μg/mg tissue protein, respectively (total 16.1 μg/mg tissue protein).

HCC tissue (No.6) has Fibroblast growth factor receptor 1/BFGF-R at 1.0, Fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 at 1.0, Insulinase/IDE at 13.3, and Prolactin receptor type 2 at 6.4 μg/mg tissue protein, respectively (total 15.3 μg/mg tissue protein).

This up-regulation of growth-hormone-related proteins in liver cancer (HCC) is significant (p < 0.05; one-tailed test; n1 = 4, n2 = 3; Mann-Whitney's U test).   Therefore, therapies by using insulin, prolactin, and growth hormone in overdose seem to be very dangerous to the patients to induce the cancers as stress-inducing factors.   

Therefore, I agree with "Genetically Modified foods effects the memory & intellectual abilities of the person? ", since genetically-modified foodstuffs surely have been made by using various virus as vectors.

Very interesting opinion!

It's difficult to observe or conclude such effect as studies need to be performed over large population for many decades. There will also be confounding factors. It appears that presently there is no such detailed studies available so that any conclusion can be drawn with confidence and have trustable stasticics.

Further added on 9 September 2017

Since your research seems to be very important, I would like to recommend to use the HPLC-photometric method to precisely and reliably measure hormones and hormone receptors in the Human or Animal Brains.   We have previously developed the protein determination method by RP-HPLC with photometric detection (please see file; Lysozyme by RP-HPLC and Insulin by RP-HPLC).   Further, protein determination of brain membrane proteins should be performed by also reliable HPLC-photometric method (please see file; HPLC-Surf-SEC protein determination method).   This is not my propaganda but my experience during brain membrane-protein research (please see file; purify brain Lipoamidase).    

I would like to express on the notorious ELISA method as a protein assay issue.

I must sadly repeat about the differences in determination value of fucoidan between HPLC-photometric method and ELISA method (please see files to compare; SEC fucoidan determination and ELISA fucoidan).

The determined value of fucoidan (Okinawa-fucan) is c.a. 2,000-fold higher in the HPLC-photometric analysis as compared to ELISA method (our experience together with Prof. Dr. Takeaki Nagamine, M.D., Graduate School of Health Sciences, Gunma University, Showa-machi, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan).   Prof. Dr. Nagamine has sorrowfully thrown away the high-price fucoidan-assay ELISA-kit when he is retiring from the University, since he has to rely upon HPLC photometric method (my unpublished experience).

(1) Direct photometric assay without purification gives only 50% value as compared to HPLC-photometric assay due to violence against the Lambert-Beer's law (please see Fig. 10 of file "SEC fucoidan determination" again). 

(2) Further, binding protein is not so specific; i.e., avidin binds biotin (vitamin H), lipoic acid (thioctic acid), and amino acids, and binding is stronger to lipoic acid than biotin (please see file; Thioctic acid determination) .   Then, biotin assay by using avidin is very difficult since serum has 10-fold higher concentration of lipoic acid than biotin; i.e., lipoic acid may interfere the biotin binding reaction of avidin.   Similarly IgG or binding-protein to antigen seems to have multiplicity for binding (please see file; multiple hydrolase LIP).  

(3) Furthermore, specificity of binding protein increases 10-fold by homo-dimerization (please see file; The Fascio Effect).   The specificity of IgG seems to be 100-fold lower than pentamer IgM due to the Fascio effect.

Then, 2 (1) x 10 (2) x 100 (3) = 2000-fold difference seems to be occurred between HPLC-photometric method and ELISA method.

Therefore, ELISA is neither quantitative nor sensitive; i.e., it gives only false value at ng/mL.