Genetically Modified Organisms And Its Effects On The Ecosystem

Ruf, Andrea. "Soil organisms as an essential element of a monitoring plan to identify the effects of GMO cultivation. Requirements – Methodology – Standardisation." BioRisk 8: 73–87 (2013) 1-16 Web. 3 Feb. 2016.

Though every major scientific regulatory oversight body in the world has concluded that GMO foods are harmless, the public remains deeply suspicious, fearing that such food may cause cancer or allergies. Caitlin Shetterly, one of the worried public, wrote an article in Elle magazine, claiming that genetically modified foods could cause allergic reactions, and that consumers face unknown and unacceptable risks from new, yet-to-be-identified allergens that our government’s monitoring program,

Genetic engineering is already providing a more stable solution for agricultural production in the economy to stand on. In nine years (i.e. 1996-2005), profits from genetically modified crops were twenty-seven billion dollars. Those twenty-seven billion dollars were not just in the United States or countries like it, but the profits almost split half and half between first and third world countries (O'Neill 19). In India, for example, cotton yields have jumped to one hundred-fifty percent from the use of genetically modified crops, vastly increasing the farmers’ profits (19). The planting of these crops can really help farmers know what they are going to make every year and plan accordingly. Also, helping the farmers’ expenses is the lack of chemical pesticides needed on the crops and reducing time spent using the pricey traditional breeding methods (Mannion and Morse 749-751). Even if genetically modified crops are not planted in every field, adjoining fields can benefit due to the “halo effect.” The “halo effect” is the ability of pest protection on the genetically modified crops to affect the non-genetically modified crops due to the lack of insects in the genetically modified field (754). Genetically modified crops affect the economy in a positive way and should be seen as a smart

Humanity’s advancements over the course of history have been due to major technological milestones. Of these milestones, arguably the most important has been the advent of agriculture. Agriculture has allowed humans to store food in surplus which frees them from slaving in fields and allows focus on more scholarly and artistic pursuits. As time has progressed, agriculture itself reach important advances, from selective breeding to artificial fertilizer. However, one of the most recent advances in modern times has been met with suspicion and distrust. Genetically modified organisms, commonly referred to as GMOs, have begun to be used in commercial agricultural and their widespread use in food for humans and livestock is on the rise. Many

Back then, farmers relied solely on the plot of soil they owned to produce fruits and vegetables. Farmers often had to deal with the threat of damaged crops from weather changes and insect pests. However, imagine being able to not increase productivity and protecting crops being ruined or eaten. Now, with advancements in technology and genetics, scientists can genetically modify organisms by altering its DNA in a way that does not occur naturally by mating or natural recombination to introduce desired physiological traits (EFFL 235). In 2000, 68% of all genetically modified, GM, crops were grown by U.S. farmers, with soybeans and corn making up 82% of all GM crops harvested in 2000 (Whitman 5). According to the European Food & Feed Law Review, scientists may transfer simple genes from the DNA from one organism into another, and also between non- related species, such as animals, bacteria, and virus to enhance desired traits (4). The use of genetic engineering was first introduced to aid farmers in an alternative other than using pesticides. Soon after, enhanced traits that improve nutrition were inputted into plants to increase nutritional value. Although the genetic engineering of GM food may create superweeds, GM food should be encouraged since it decreases the need for pesticides, increases food supply, and improves the nutrition of food.

However, despite this professional origin of GMOs, they can be used for more than observation in a laboratory. Specifically, GMOs should be used in homes because they are a safe, superior alternative to regular produce. New advances in science have allowed experimenters to add certain genes of noxious bacteria, giving plants a natural defense to pests, reducing the need for the use of pesticides, while still being safe for humans to eat (Duvauchelle 2). The diminished use of ammonia, arsenic, and chlorine-common ingredients in pesticides-means the chance of those damaging chemicals used in everyday food and finding its way to the dinner table is diminished as well. The decreased use of pesticides is not the only way GMOs could be considered safe. In fact, because of the controversy over the use of GMOs, they have been tested more than any average product in agriculture, even before they reach consumers’ hands, and no dependable data has proven that GMOs are harmful to humans (“Commonly Asked Questions…” 1). Not only are they examined for safe uses in agriculture, GMO’s are additionally tested for possible allergens, and nutritional values as well (“Commonly Asked Questions…”

“Genetically Modified organisms as they are commonly known, are organisms that have been created using a certain gene-splicing techniques”. The organism is created in a lab environment, and their foundation, or make up is derived from a combination of other beings; thus Genetically Modified Organism. Creating a GMO carries dangerous consequences. When companies mix the genetic makeup of another species, sometimes unrelated, the fallout and detriment is massive. Several issues that come from altering a natural food source is an onset of toxins, allergens, and the effect has the most affect, the nutritional value of the altered food is negatively impacted. What is shocking is that in the United States it is not unlawful to alter a natural

GMOs, or “genetically modified organisms,” are plants or animals that have been genetically engineered with DNA from bacteria, viruses or other plants and animals. These experimental combinations of genes from different species cannot occur in nature or in traditional crossbreeding. There are currently eight Genetically modified organisms available in grocery stores across America, they are cotton, alfalfa, papaya, squash, soybeans, canola, corn and sugar beets. Many believe putting genetically modified organisms in our food system is unsafe when others believe it is saving the world. After this paper you can decide what you think.

  You may know about the emerging field of biotechnology - the medicine, the ethics, the DNA, the Human Genome, etc.  But few realize the emergence of its agricultural branch, and the international conflict that has arisen from it.  It may apply to you more than you thought, for half of the soybean products and a quarter of the corn you ate in 1999 may have been genetically modified (Kaufman A6).  Genetically modified crops (commonly referred to as GMOs) are crops whose characteristics have been altered to produce a favorable trait, whether it be prolonged freshness, a more attractive appearance, or pesticide resistance (Activist 1).  Genetic alteration is the act of inserting a gene,

The revolution and improvement of agricultural crops have seen an increase in the last decade because of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). “A genetically modified organism, or GMO, is an organism that has had its DNA altered or modified in some way through genetic engineering” (Lallanilla 2013). A GMO is stronger compared to its original species or generation because it has a new gene that allows it to survive in a new environment or against a predator or pest. A GMO can come in different forms, such as modified animals or plants and crops. A genetically modified crop has many benefits over the original crop, such as bigger product yield, higher resistance to disease, prolonging the genetically modified crops shelf life, and a more

Aside from simply being healthier for the individual than naturally created counterparts, genetically modified crops also have the advantage of being environmentally friendlier as well. Using GMOs reduces the amount of pesticides and herbicides used in crops, therefore reducing the overall amount of toxins in the air. The U.S. Department of Agriculture states that GMOs have “allowed for a significant reduction in the use of persistent, synthetic pesticides that may contaminate groundwater and the environment” (Biotechnology FAQ). Author James McWilliams notes how such reductions “excite scientists” as “GMO technology allows them to play a meaningful role in reducing the carbon footprint” (McWilliams). Furthermore, the effects of harmful toxins also decreases with wildlife. The U.S. Department of Agriculture points out that genetic modifications to crops “enable[s] the use of reduced-risk herbicides that break down more quickly in soil and are non-toxic to wildlife and humans” (Biotechnology FAQ). Soil salinity has been a growing agricultural problem in the San Joaquin valley resulting in minimal to no crop growth. To combat this issue, a gene from the Avicenna Marina plant has been implanted into a tobacco plant making it able to tolerate the high salt levels (UC Santa Cruz). Some may argue that the chemicals removed from the pesticides are merely added to the environment through the GMO use, therefore the harmful effects are present regardless of GMO usage. However,

A well known example of this is the use of Bacillus thuringiensis, otherwise known as B.t genes, being injected into corn. This gene enables corn to produce its own pesticides against various insects. Traditionally, the process of enhancing desired traits in plants was done by breeding, but the conventional methods of breeding have been found to be both time consuming and not always accurate. This traditional method stays within the limits of nature, whereas biotechnology “plays God” and disrupts natures natural course. Some examples of FDA approved GM crops include, “tomatoes and cantaloupes that have modified ripening characteristics, soybeans and sugar beets that are resistant to herbicides, and corn and cotton plants with increased resistance to insects pests” (Assouline 15). In America, nine crops are the top commercialized GM products and sold to consumers nationwide. These include, soy (98 percent GM), cotton (83 percent GM), canola (75 percent GM), corn (60 percent GM), Papaya (57 percent GM), alfalfa, zucchini, and yellow squash (Assouline 17). These new technologies, raise recondite questions that should be answered before moving forward with the advancement and use of said technology.

The first genetically modified organism, in 1973, consisted of bacterial cells that were injected with ribosomial RNA genes from an African clawed toad (Xenopus). An experiment which was conducted by Stanley Cohen, Herbert Boyer, and Paul Berg (Wells). However, the first organism genetically modified and sold to the general public in 1994 was the, albeit unsuccessful, Flavr Savr delayed-ripening tomato, according to the GMO timeline. While the tomato was able to resist rotting it failed to resist becoming squishy so while it was riper longer it lost its firmness and was unappealing to the public for consumption. Other genetically modified foods discontinued from the market that deserve brief mentions are the NewLeaf potato, StarLink corn, Zeneca tomato paste, Triffid flax, and Bt176 corn all pulled from the market after only a few short years as they did not meet standards set by the FDA nor did they appeal to the public.

Genetic engineering has also been associated with health risks (Nelson, 2001). This is because the process can render some foods which were at some point safe to consume hazardous to those consumers with allergies. The process of genetic engineering cannot be entirely predictable, and foreign substances can develop in these genetically modified foods. This is a fact that is known to the FDA as it does some testing of the final product (Ahmed, 2004). However, there can be no guarantees as to the purity of these genetically modified foods. Besides, introducing new genes to animals and plants can result in the already existing genes to react in a certain way that can include changes in the quality of the organism and reduction of the organism’s nutritional value. Other viewpoints have been brought forth to oppose the production of GMOs such as the arguments that these organisms give rise to ecological risks, upsets the natural balance, hence posing a danger to biodiversity, and that suggesting that genetic engineering is a tool for the corporate to control agriculture (Ahmed, 2004).

While America is excited about genetically modified organisms and think that they are god sent other countries are weary of them and think that they are dangerous. While many other countries label genetically modified organisms because they think that people should have a choice whether or not they want to consume them America believes that their people should not have to know therefore taking the people 's choice away and making the decision for them. There have been studies that have shown that genetically modified organisms have opened doors to new possibilities, but at the same time have become a danger to humans and the environment. Although some may think that genetic engineering is progress for humanity others think America should not produce and sell genetically modified organisms because it is unsafe for human consumption, and it is harmful to the environment.