Genetically Modified Crops : Hope For Developing Countries?

Genetically Modified Organisms (G.M.O.s) debates have plagued society and politicians since the idea of G.M.O.s have come to the playing field. Should farmers use them? What are the risks of G.M.O.s? Can G.M.O.s cause cancer in humans? All of these questions as well as a collection of others are waiting to be answered. The article “A Lonely Quest for Facts on Genetically Modified Crops” by Amy Harmon is concentrated on a councilman-Greggar Ilagan- researching questions he has about G.M.O.s so he can make an educated vote on whether or not to pass a ban on genetically modified crops.

In a perfect world, what would everyone have? Well, they most likely would have good health, money, stability, and proper environment to live very productive lives. This is what people strive to have, but very few receive. Why? There are many reasons. One reason might be the lack of agricultural advancement in many countries. If these countries were to embrace genetically modified crops, the citizens would have much better lives. According to Osakabe, Yuriko, Kajita, and Osakabe, in their article “Genetic Engineering Of Woody Plants: Current And Future Targets In A Stressful Environment”, genetic engineering in plants is better than traditional breeding methods because “…they bypass the long generation for breeding…” (106).

GMOs are living organisms whose genetic material has been artificially manipulated in a laboratory through genetic engineering. The GMO debate has a huge gap just like the climate change’s ambiguous debate. Some people are for the consumption of it and have as arguments that GMOs will feed the future population of the world that is expected to double in the few years to come, or that scientists can build stronger crops that resist to pests, therefore less use of pesticides. Some are against these ideas because they think that GMOs represent a threat to the environment and that they can cause a lot of health problems. The goal of this paper is to look at two articles “The GMO Debate is Over Again” by Mark Lynas and" Seeds of Evil: Monsanto and Genetic Engineering" by Dr. Joseph Mercola, and see where the use rhetorical strategies are effective and where they are not.

Due to reading “Stuffed and Starved” by Raj Patel this semester, I learned about how foods are produced and impact the world. Ever since I visited the farmer’s market in October, I became more aware of whether or not I am consuming genetically modified crops. Raj Patel revealed some of the many truths about the Green Revolution regarding genetically modified crops that influenced my choice of eating. Prior to reading the section of the book that made me aware of what I am eating, I believed that genetically modified crops were more beneficial than harmful to everyone. Not only did the genetically modified crops produce a higher yield to feed people, but the negative impact of technology outweighed its benefit. For example, Patel states, “domestic

Genetically modified crops are an incredibly important issue that everyone should be aware of since it is something we are exposed to at a daily basis. Genetically modified crops also known as GM crops or Biotech crops has been one of the most heated debates of issues within our society. The debate about the safety, concerns and disadvantages of GM crops have raged since the mid 1990 's but this is due to the lack of knowledge of the general public. Many people are unaware of what the GM crops actually are and what they offer. Genetically modified crops are plants that are used in the agriculture and have been modified to initiate a new trait to plants that does not happen naturally in the species. These plants are modified using genetic engineering techniques to enhance desired traits. GM crops are made when genes of commercial interest are transferred from one organism to another.() There are many methods used for the production of GM crops but the two primary used for plant insertion are gene guns and agrobacterium tumefaciens. There are also three types of modifications which are transgenic, cisgenic, and subgenic plants. However, there are a number of issues that surround this controversial topic such as environmental, health, and economic concerns. Even though there are some worrying facts about GM crops people don 't realize the advantages or the ways it has helped humans as well as animals. There are many reasons why GM crops are proven

Genetically modified food’s, or GMOs, goal is to feed the world's malnourished and undernourished population. Exploring the positive side to GMOs paints a wondrous picture for our planet’s future, although careful steps must be taken to ensure that destruction of our ecosystems do not occur. When GMOs were first introduced into the consumer market they claimed that they would help eliminate the world’s food crisis by providing plants that produced more and were resistant to elemental impacts like droughts and bacterial contaminants, however, production isn’t the only cause for the world’s food crisis. Which is a cause for concern because the population on the earth is growing and our land and ways of agriculture will not be enough to feed

Over the past decades, agriculture technology and productivity has been changing drastically to fit the needs of the world population. The largest agricultural production country, the United States, has been experiencing these changes more rapidly just to meet these agricultural demands. This in turn has lead to serious controversies over the ethics and morals of some agricultural practices, namely Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). With the US population increasing every year, US farmers had to develop some way to meet the high demands of the people, therefore, GMOs were developed to help increase crop yields while also helping farmers financially by using less pesticides and herbicides.

John Robbins, author of The Food Revolution states that “if genetically engineered plants were designed to reverse world hunger, you would expect them to bring higher yields. But there is increasing evidence that they do just the opposite”. Numerous studies have shown that GM crops do not have a higher yield production, but in fact have at times shown a lower outcome. In 2000, “research done by the University of Nebraska found the yields of GE soybeans were six to eleven percent lower than conventional plants” (Robbins). Evidence that GM foods are not the answer to world hunger continues to pile up. Former US EPA and US FDA biotech specialist Dr. Doug Gurian-Sherman acknowledges that GM crops are not beneficial to solving world hunger: “as of this year [2008], there are no commercialized GM crops that inherently increase yield. Similarly, there are no GM crops on the market that were engineered to resist drought, reduce fertilizer pollution or save soil. Not one” (“10 Reasons Why we don’t Need GM Foods”). Genetically modified corn is a product that has been modified to the extreme in recent years. Here, you can clearly see the physical differences between organic and GM corn. In response to Monsanto’s statement, eighteen African delegates clearly objected, noting that it would undermine their capacity to feed

In an ever changing world, there are only a few things that are certain that all people need. It is said that a human can last three minutes without air, three hours without shelter, three days without water, and three weeks without food. The typical American farmer in 2017 feeds about 155 people compared to the 25.8 people in 1960. The thought of genetically modified organisms is nothing more than just a regulatory muddle. Agriculture is such a widely conversed topic however, through extensive research, international experiments, and general education, it is clear that genetically modified organisms (GMO’s) are safe on all aspects as well as necessary to continue to feed the people.

In this article, Tamara Thompson asks common questions regarding genetically modified organisms otherwise known as GMOs. She gives a decent definition of GMOs as plant seeds that are modified to resist certain insects as well as harsh weather conditions. It is a very biased article, drawing attention to the company, Monsanto, in particular. She repeatedly assures her readers that GMOs are safe and that Monsanto currently works to the standards of organizations, such as the Food and Drug Administrations (FDA), Dept. of Agriculture (USDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). She concludes with the benefits of GMOs nutritional value and how they contribute to reducing draws on natural resources such as fossil fuels. This article was beneficial, although biased it gave insight to what companies such as Monsanto want the public to believe. I found this article in Opposing Viewpoints with the search entry being genetically modified foods.

Genetically modified foods, known as GMFs, are an extremely controversial subject. By definition, GMO’s are, “organisms whose genome has been altered by the techniques of genetic engineering so that its DNA contains one or more genes not normally found there.” Scientists genetically engineer these foods to, for example, contain an additional vitamin or weather withstanding qualities. Relatively recently, Kevin O’Leary, who was in favor of GMFs, and Rachel Parent, who was against them, had a televised debate on O’Leary’s talk show. While both sides proved valid points, O’Leary’s argument seemed the most convincing, with multiple data points and references. While genetically modified foods have many obvious benefits and drawbacks, the good seem to outweigh the bad on a global scale. GMFs can increase nutrition in third world countries, stop the world wide issue of waste, and even slow global warming and deforestation in our environment.

However, these risks are purely speculative: 81 separate studies costing approximately $65 million have been conducted by the European Commission alone and have shown no evidence of any risk linked to GM foods (1). Indeed, the U.S. has concluded that the risk of GM crops is minimal. As a result, in the U.S., genetically altered crops accounted for 93% of planted soybeans and cotton and 86% of corn in 2009. (2). Considering the success and benefits of GM crops in America, developing countries have followed suit. In 2009, India planted 84,000 square kilometers of genetically modified cotton, and Brazil planted 214,000 square kilometers of GM soybeans, a 26% increase from the year before (3). Like the U.S., these countries conducted a risk-benefit analysis and concluded that the economic, health, and food surplus benefits of GM crops offset the unproven risks (4). Thus, agricultural biotechnology is being implemented in farming techniques throughout the world.

Advocates and opponents have made very contrasting claims about the benefits and potential risks of GMOs, and each pointed to their own favourite pieces of evidence without any straight answer. In general, agro-biotechnologist advocates and crop science companies promote the use of GM technology as a risk-free alternative to enhance food quality in particular and for the overall economic benefits at large (Nelson, 2001). On the other hand, opponents including some scientist and environmentalist view the application of genetic modification in food crops as a lethal interference between the realm of nature and human leading to unknown health hazards, socioeconomic risks and regulatory constraints (Nelson, 2001). Incidentally, the nature of GM debate among the public and the experts is exceptionally different (Hansen et al., 2003). While consumers are more focused on tangible benefits such as price, features and tangible benefits of GM foods, expert’s differences of opinion are concentrated mostly in three major areas a) the safety regimes for both human and environment; b) regulatory framework of GMOs in local as well as international context and c) the allied economic constraints of commercialisation of GMOs (Paarlberg, 2002). Thus, literature cited in the present study are subdivided in accordance with these three major areas of conflict among the experts, including a brief discussion about the role of the media in GM

To begin with, in the ESS lecture of Oct.1st, a debate between Dr. Thomas and Dr. Patel presents a conflict caused by GMOs. On Dr. Thomas’s position, we can find the direct advantage of GMOs food comparing to the traditional agriculture by scientific analysis, such as the ability to resist disease, and yields of the field. GMOs food had already spread out over the world- which was saying the technique had already mature enough to benefit people efficiently, especially the poor. Besides, the improvement of GMO technology can also accelerate some of the other industries like international trade, education in the Third World Country. On the other side, the social problem that was found by Dr. Patel was different: if it was necessary for the poor to plant GMOs. On his position, the media was telling people that GMO food was helping the poor, however, the fact was the farmers only received a little knowledge about the current

Although, critics take on GMO’s is highly skeptical, the future of genetically engineered crops offer promising benefits to the agricultural industry and food markets of the world. This paper presents arguments and provides research evidence to support the claim that GMO’s can lead to higher production of high quality crops safe for human and animal consumption. GE food will be the key to solving the world food crisis in the future.