Genetically Modified Food in Canada Essay

The article “Not in my fridge” by Jeffery M. Smith elaborately discussed the health hazards of genetically modified (GM) products. This article has opened my eyes and revealed my ignorance of how unmindful of what I have eaten for years. I was very alarmed by many of the things I have learned in this article. After learning the side-effect of GM food, I was certainly concerned for our health. Moreover, learning that the biotech company’s strong stand in advocate of GM products as well as the United States governments and the Food and Drug administration (FDA) cover up of serious safety issues of GM highly disturbed me.

In the essay “Genetically Modified Food: Watching What We Eat,” by Julie Cooper, she argues against the rampant use of genetically modified food (GMO) without any current form of regulation. Cooper discusses the possibility of health risks to those consuming foods with altered genes and the food’s capabilities to have far-reaching health risks. She continues with a discussion as to how and why the creation and use of the GMOs have become so unregulated. She then discusses the response, which is the public’s cry for their right to make informed choices. Other topics discusses are the political, environmental, and corporate ramifications of the rise of GMOs.

Recently, delegates of famine stricken Southern African nations and representatives from the United States and the European Union came together to resolve issues regarding the acceptance of Genetically modified Food aid from the United States of America. Concerns and complications stemmed from humanitarian, economical, social and political grounds.

Genetically Modified Organisms, or GMO’s, are organisms that have had genes from a different organism implanted into their own genetic code in order to produce a new result (“Genetically engineered foods”). This practice has elicited polar responses across the globe, for a multitude of reasons. Besides the obvious reason, being the morality of changing an organism's DNA for human benefit, one frequently noted problem is the monopolization of GMO’s by the company Monsanto, whose name is nearly synonymous with GMO’s due to their involvement with these crops. Monsanto has been at the center of many controversies regarding GMO’s, and is even considered to be ranked third to last for reputation among all major American companies (Bennett). Most

Because of the success of transgenic crops like Bt corn, the usage and availability of GMOs has increased exponentially. The number of GM crops produced in the United States grew from 1.45 hectares in 1996 to over 29 million in 2000. This accounts for about 70% of the total GM crops grown in the world (European Commission 2). Similar patterns have emerged from other agriculture-intensive countries like Canada, Argentina, China, and Brazil. Large percentages of products like soybeans (68%), cotton (50%) and corn (28%) are now

Farming policy of seed patenting should be abolished, and farmers should have the right to reuse seeds. The farming polices like seed patenting is eliminating ancient farming practices and controlling the food supply and the farmers, as journalists Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele revealed “Whoever provides the world’s seeds controls the world’s food supply” (165). Congress and seeds industries like Monsanto should not have the power to change the farming policies. The ancient farming practices of saving seeds from season to season is diminishing due to farmers buying seeds from Monsanto. Monsanto prohibits farmers to save seeds from their harvest and replant those seeds. Monsanto’s genetically modified (G.M.) seeds, that resist to its

Genetically modified crops are harmful to humans and the environment and shouldn't be used. Agriculture should proceed in harmony with nature and nature only. That is why some people have decided to buy organically grown food. From their experiences with organic food, they believe that the organic system can be economically practical. This system also provides a wide range of environmental and social benefits, and most importantly, it enables consumers to make a choice about the food they eat. According to Diana Brander, an American biology teacher, we should have the choice of the type of food we eat.

Sixty four countries around the world have banned the use of GMOs, otherwise known as Genetically Modified Organisms, within farms and supermarkets. However, the United States, a usually technologically advanced country, has yet to invest much time or effort into this endeavour, one that would make food healthier for people and protect the environment. The US government has taken a step back in this effort for healthier food options, as in the country, companies that use GMOs are not required to label their food as such. Some companies and businesses, however, are working to make a change in the case for GMOs in the US, by advocating minimized GMO usage, menu transparency, or the complete ban of the usage.

By the year 2012, over 70 percent of the processed foods in the U.S can be linked to genetically modified organisms, or GMOs. Despite this strong dependency on the manipulation of genetic material, there are many questions concerning long-lasting impacts such food could bring. The government of the United States of America should enforce stricter restrictions on the consumption, production, and availability of food products containing genetically modified organisms. Genetically engineered foods have detrimental impacts on the environment, are linked to large, monopolizing industries, and do not reduce world hunger.

Many people are unaware that there have not been sufficient tests conducted that prove GMOs are entirely safe. Therefore, people ought to consider the potential health risks they are taking when consuming a GM food product. However, since most biotech companies such as Monsanto, Cargill, Dow, Bayer and others do not advertise that their food products contain GMOs, consumers are not aware that most of the foods they purchase have been genetically modified. It is obvious to suspect that these companies are benefiting from the public’s lack of knowledge. Consumers need to be made aware when they are purchasing genetically modified products. Genetically modified organisms can potentially cause harm to our environment and have a detrimental effect on human health.

The patenting of GMO corn and soybean seeds is quite a deceptive business move on Monsanto’s part because it appears to protect the seeds that farmers purchase, but in turn the patents really only look out for the company’s best interest. While Monsanto sues farmers and traps them in debt for using patented products, it pretends to be working for farmers’ welfare. This paper exposes Monsanto’s use of Genetically Modified Organisms exhibited in “Induced Nuisance: Holding Patent Owners Liable for GMO Cross-Contamination” to uncover the damaging environmental and economic effects their business practices have on privately owned farms. Monsanto’s use of gene patents is responsible for the destruction of many farms, the reduction in crop varieties, and the development of resistant weeds and pests all in the name of corporate expansion. This paper also reveals Monsanto’s role in the legalization and use of gene patents globally. Monsanto’s recklessness is being uncovered in this paper because their advantageous business practices exemplify greed and class

is genetically modified in the laboratory area (Health Canada, 2016). In general, most of the common food in the market is genetically modified. Although countries include German have rules to push farmers highlight their GMO products, Canada and the USA don’t have the rule. Reason of that may be the consideration of economies, but for engineers, the risks of genetically modified food should be concerned. Codes of engineering ethics identify a specific precedence with respect to the engineer's consideration for the public, clients, employers, and the profession. For GMO food, although no reports have yet shown that the food will do harm to the human body, engineers have to consider about the possible risks and let people know about

The late nineteenth century brought forth some of the most breakthrough scientific discoveries. One such breakthrough were Genetically Engineered (Modified) Organisms which were initially meant to reduce world hunger by being able to mass produce crops and also allow the produce to have a longer shelf life and be more ripe. However, the increasing methods of germinating crops and new, more compelling evidence from thorough scientific research has led to the conclusion that foods with Genetically Modified material can lead to dangerous diseases and side effects. In 2011, every eight in ten Americans did not know that the foods they were consuming contained Genetically Engineered Organisms, because about 90% of popularly consumed crops in the United States were made using Genetic Engineering (D 'Ambrosio). Although this relatively new scientific discovery can possibly help to end world hunger, it has not made any progress since the early 2000’s when the European Union made it a law to label all foods that contained Genetically Modified Organisms, which led to more consumers switching to organic foods. The United States has no such law making it mandatory for companies to label their products as not natural which gives consumers misleading nutritional facts. The issue of mandatory labeling of all GM foods has become a heated debate and has quickly become an important issue for many large companies. Advocates of mandatory labeling

As human beings, we rely on food every day, and without it we wouldn’t be able to function properly. Over the decades, with our fast pace advances in production and new technology we are able to produce large quantities of food with Genetically Modified Organisms. GM foods are produced because of the idea that consumers and producers both have an advantage to obtaining these products. For Example, GM products hold many benefits, from nutritional value to durability against environment. GM productions were concentrated mostly on producers to benefit the farmers in their products by aiming to increase the crop protection and resistance to plant diseases or viruses. Considering these new advances; consumers, farmers and policymakers worldwide are challenged to reach consent with a clear vision for the future of the world’s food supply. The contemporary GMO food debate illustrates the serious conflict between two groups: Biological Recombinant DNA investors and affiliated scientists who consider this technology a solution to food shortages; and independent scientists, environmentalists, farmers and consumers that suggest these advances increase risk to environmental and health issues.

With an ever-growing population and the problems of world hunger, there has been a high demand for an increased food supply and a better food supply. Technology has been called upon to meet this challenge. The advent of genetically engineered foods, sometimes called transgenic crops or genetically modified foods, is not a new concept, but the controversy over it is. Can these "frankenfoods" be harmful to humans? What are their effects on the environment? The following paper will focus on such questions as well as providing a better understanding of what genetically modified foods are and how they should be regulated.