Genetically-modified potato approved by USDA

© Thinkstock

The US Department of Agriculture has announced its approval for the commercial farming of a new genetically-modified potato that was designed to resist bruising and the production of a carcinogenic chemical when it is fried.

Officially approved on Friday, the "Innate" potato was developed by Idaho-based J.R. Simplot Co., original supplier of French fries to McDonalds in the 1960s. The company continues to be a major supplier to the fast food chain today, as well as several other chains.

Potato producers have long been after a bruise-resistant potato, according to a report, as bruising during shipping and handling can become less valuable. The tubers were also engineered to produce less acrylamide, known to cause cancer in lab animals, when fried.

The Innate potato is the latest genetically-modified organism (GMO) to be approved by the USDA and other modified crops include those resistant to pesticides or to drought. The bruise-resistance aspect of the Innate Potato is similar to genetically-modified, non-browning apples currently awaiting approval by the USDA, the Times reported.

Many people have voiced their skepticism about these unnatural food items - despite their potential for reducing starvation and blight. A study published in April found that true, historical cautionary tales of famine weren't enough to convince most shoppers that GMOs are a good thing.

In the study, researchers recounted stories of the 1850s potato famine to a group of grocery shoppers then asked them about their support for GMOs. Another group of shoppers was told to think about famine-causing plants diseases in a more general sense before their support was questioned.

"If you think genetically modified crops are dangerous 'frankenfoods' and/or that crop disease is best controlled with chemicals - if you suspect federal regulators care more about Big Ag's interests than your family's, thus the whole game is rigged - plaintive tales of historical famines won't change your mind about genetic modification for disease resistance," said study author Katherine A. McComas, a science communications professor at Cornell University.

"Preconceived views about risks and benefits of agricultural genetic engineering - and perceptions about the fairness and legitimacy of the decision-making process - these things matter most," she added.

McComas and her co-authors noted that their research did provide new information on how people think about GMOs and their place in society.

"While support (for disease-resistant GM crops) may be a function of views about risks and benefits, legitimacy perceptions come from views about decision-making processes," they wrote.