Gmo Case Study

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.

These concerns are about the potential of illnesses GMOs could cause. An article observes, “In the 20-plus years on the market, GMOs have not caused or contributed to a single illness or death” (“GMO Myths Vs. Facts”). There have not been any traces of illnesses after multiple testing of GMO products. Since there are only ten commercially farmed genetically modified crops in the United States, the possibility of people getting a disease from them is rare; especially because three of the crops are mainly for feeding livestock. People have believed multiple problems are linked to GMOs. For instance, “in 2013, the journal food and chemical toxicology retracted a paper linked to herbicide roundup and round up-tolerant GM corn to cancer and premature death in rats… they found researchers had used too few rats… and the results were inconclusive” (Colbert, par. 16). Since the researchers did not have enough evidence, the possibility of the problem being GMOs are

A hallmark of the Second World War was the advancement and deployment of vast amounts of propaganda that rallied nations against the enemies abroad and at home. A notable user of propaganda was the Nazi party in Germany. They used white propaganda to show the strength of the Axis forces in the war, to generate support for the persecution of Jews, to foster hatred for the Allies, and to support the authoritarianism of Hitler and the Nazis. Their ability to suppress outside, independent information coupled with their influential propaganda allowed them to rally the masses around their united cause to extinguish the Jewish population and defeat the Allies. The Nazis strategically connected the Allies to the Jewish population and vice-versa,

Presently there is no scientific evidence to support that GMOs are inherently bad, despite more than 30 years and thousands of studies that were conducted. The population is growing and Policy should lead to the development of regulatory frameworks that minimize the number of new data requirements and maximize the value of existing

This article brings about a vital question to the forefront, are GMOs really safe? The article goes on to dissect all the myths about genetic modification and points out the fact that there has been no strict regulation on the production

A Brief Report on: “Drinking with Your Kids” Parental provision and locations to consume alcohol are associated with a significant increase in minors alcohol use, heavy episodic drinking and alcohol associated issues. The research method used to conduct this study is a case study. A case study is an in-depth inquiry of an individual subject. Psychologist gathered data from different longitudinal, cross-sectional and quantitative studies to view how different approaches of direct supply of alcohol to minors from their parents significantly increased alcohol use, heavy episodic drinking and alcohol associated issues.

Food is everywhere. It is an integral part of society and is a major part of everyday life. We plan our days around mealtimes, pack snacks for work and school, and visit the grocery store at least once a week. However, even our best, well thought out efforts to achieve a healthy lifestyle leave us mostly in the dark about what we are really putting into our bodies. GMOs, Genetically Modified Organisms, are organisms that have been bioengineered, planted, and sold to the public as food. These organisms are unnatural and have proven to be harmful. Unfortunately, the labeling of foods containing GMOs is not government mandated. Monsanto, the largest GMO producing conglomerate, will go to all lengths to convince the public that their product is safe and does not need to be labeled for consumers, despite the fact that countries around the world have stood up and refused to sell their products to their citizens. Unfortunately, the United States is not only not among these countries, but the government has shown little care for the global issue. Everyone has the right to know exactly what they are putting into their bodies and feeding their loved ones. For this reason I will be exploring how, with the existing research, GMOs are FDA approved, as well as how this relates to Monsanto’s fight against GMO labeling.

When it comes to the topic of whether Genetic Modified Organisms (GMO) are safe or not, most of us will readily agree that it has become an issue. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of is it really safe to consume them. Whereas some are convinced that GMOs are safe and improve the production of crops, others maintain that GMOs are not safe and should be eradicated. I disagree that GMOs are safe for human consumption because as a recent research has shown they can cause severe organ damage and fatal diseases. GMOs should be banned and remove from all food sources until they are proved safe for consumption.

Another contributing factor to the controversial nature of GMOs is the fact that a majority of the world does not consider such food products safe, since “ in more than 60 countries around the world, including Australia, Japan, and all of the countries in the European Union, there are significant restrictions or outright bans on the production and sale of GMOs” (The Non-GMO). However, even though genetically engineered organisms are widely considered to be unsafe in many aspects, the U.S. government has little to no restrictions on the production and consumption of these products.

Thesis: With the impending push for more widely available genetically modified or engineered organisms (GMOs), and the recent re-regulation of the labeling of such products, GMOs are an important topic worthy of class debate.

Unfortunately there is not only bullying in schools, there is bullying in the workplace as well. These are unacceptable behaviors that arise within a workplace situation. Bullying the workplace can take many forms and it’s not easy to always identify. The Fair Work Act 2009 made recent amendments that came into effect in January 2014 to define workplace bullying as occurring when an individual; group of individuals; repeatedly behaves unreasonably towards the worker, group of workers of which the worker is a member; and the behavior creates a risk to health and safety (Le Mire & Owens, 2014). This definition focuses on three main elements of bullying behavior, it is repeated, unreasonable, and creates a risk to health and safety. All three elements must be satisfied in order for bullying at the workplace to be found. Bullying behaviors could be things that are victimizing, humiliating, intimidating or threatening, but it is not limited to just those behaviors.

In light recent technological advancements, the agricultural field has seen a huge shift in the way food is produced, manufactured and regulated. Standing on the frontier of molecular biology is the introduction of Genetically Modified Organisms or GMO’s into the food industry as a means of creating better crops. Since the initial merging of GMO and the food industry there has been a growing use of genetically modified crops, an increase in the creation of new strains, and expansion in the use, manufacturing and distribution of these products. In the past 20 years alone Canada has seen a visible rise of GMO foods available in grocery stores, specifically as a part of basic ingredients that make up a diversity of food products (David Suziki). Thus, the GMO revolution has unapologetically established itself in the food industry and has become a large feature of food production today. Nevertheless, the creation and implementation of these practices is not without its share of concern and controversy. Despite its steady expansion, there is still much to be said about the safety of these products and the procedures by which they are formed under, the potential health risks they pose, the damage it causes to the agricultural business and the effect it has on the environment. Altogether, evidence points to several issues associated with GMO and its integration with food safety, health, the industry and the environment.

Approval procedure simplified. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is charged with carrying out scientific risk assessment.

Much of the public concern surrounding the safety of GMOs stems from the process of actually creating them. This is admittedly not a natural process, which is a surefire way to raise critic’s eyebrows in doubting their safety. However, there is no evidence that supports these myths. The Committee on Genetically Engineered Crops, The National Academy of Science, and the Board on Agriculture and Natural Recourses all agree after extensive testing and observation that there is no additional harm in the consumption of GMO food. The research conducted in animal studies, as well as chemical analysis of the crops, show no indication that GMOs are negatively affecting human health. The next allegation hurled at GMOs is that they may have

Organic food companies, chefs and consumer groups have stepped up their efforts, so far unsuccessfully, to get the government to exercise more oversight of engineered foods. Their argument is that GM seeds and pollen are floating from field to field and contaminating pure crops. These groups have been bolstered by a growing network of consumers who are wary of processed and modified foods (“Shoppers Wary of GM Foods Find They’er Everywhere”). However, acreage planted for GM pharmaceutical crops