Gmo Labeling As The Choice Debate Topic Essay

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

GMOs, (genetically modified organisms) have been a topic of interest in the social eyes for years. Since they’ve been created, many people have voiced and written about their opinions on GMOs, and whether they are dangerous or not. Created to expand the genetic diversity of crops and animals, many don’t know whether GMOs are good or bad, and neither do researchers. Though there hasn’t been any evidence claiming whether GMOs are good or bad, it has certainly not stopped the public from creating their own opinions. Since no one knows the truth behind GMO, it has opened a window of opportunities for companies including Monsanto to voice their support of GMO, while other companies like the Non-GMO Project voice their

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

Over the past few decades a new controversy has arisen in the scientific community: should Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s) be used in modern society. There are generally two sides to this debate: one being in favor of GMO use and the other against it. Pro GMO activists believe that GMOs can help address hunger issues and help reduce use of pesticides/insecticides while Anti-GMO activists state that it is a threat to the agriculture industry, and should be banned. Both sides have several valid points, however GMO’s are even more complicated from initial glance, and may not be as dangerous as some believe.

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.

“Should We Care About Genetically Modified Foods?” by John N. Shaw appeared in Food Safety News issue of February 1, 2010, as a feature under the health section on the controversy between the pros and cons of genetically modified foods (Also known as GMO, genetically modified organisms). The main idea of this article is to inform people of the benefits of GMOs . The author, John Shaw received his Bachelor of Science degree in Finance with a minor in Marketing from the University of Arkansas in 2007, where he was a “leadership scholar.” In addition to his studies, he has worked as a research assistant with Food Law LL.M. Director Susan Schneider, interned with Wal-Mart Government and Corporate Affairs division, the Arkansas Attorney General Public Protection Division, and with United States Senator Blanche Lincoln. John has a passion for Food Law, sports, and outdoors. In the article, he states, “ I submit that I am no scientist; merely an interested student.” According to the article, he is passionate and has done sufficient research about the topic to support his argument.

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

The theme of agriculture and even more specifically genetically modified organisms helped to critically examine the dangers and hazards of such GMOs. Knowing the potential issues with GMOs from class helped understand and effectively critique this article more. The examples and real world statistics in this article magnified the importance of GMO labeling and the dangers imposed upon consumers who eat such foods.

An interest statement: I think this topic will keep me engaged because I did my last essay on the use of GMOs and now I am curious to see why people are opposed to the labeling of them and how they will impact the farmers if the labeling laws pass in certain states. I know families typically prefer organic food, however, it appears that this is the case because the word “organic” sounds pleasing. Most people seem very uneducated on what GMOs really are and just assume from the media that they are horrible technological advances. This topic seems like a very current issue which will allow me to find an abundance of useful information.

The idea of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has been a controversy for the past several years. Some groups claim that they are perfectly safe and possibly even better than organic foods, while other groups contradict that and say that GMOs are harmful to both the environment and the people that consume them. One of the questions that still hangs in the air through all the debates and protests is “should GMOs be labelled?”

GMO Controversy. The beginning of the altering of DNA, which has been encoded in both plants and animals, results in drastic consequences applied to both pro and anti GM foods. Within this article a GMO is referred to as “transgenic crops, where the genes from a nonplant organism (usually bacteria) are deliberately inserted into a plant (using recombinant DNA or gene-splicing) in hopes the new plant will exhibit certain desirable traits” (Norwood, Oltenacu, Lorenzo, & Lancaster, 2015, p. 60). Arguably the traits do not always have the best of outcomes. Genetic mutations which show morbid alterations within the bodies of animals and humans, are less likely to have exposure, limiting the discussion or visual representation, outside of the producer.

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are genetic materials; which have been altered through biotechnology. Many crops sold around the world are genetically modified. GMOs undergo changes to fit a specific purpose such as pest-resistant crops. Despite the fact that GMOs are commonly used, there has been many disagreements regarding whether or not they should be labeled. Although GMOs have been deemed safe by the FDA they concluded that labeling GMOs are unnecessary, citizens disagree and suggest GMOs should be labeled because labels provide benefits and also allow people to have positive attitudes regarding GMOs; also not labeling GMOs infringes on an American citizen’s freedom and the labels could start a governmental public campaign

It is imperative that GMOs gain more popularity, and fast, before more consumers view them as “unsafe” and boycott them. In the future, GMOs will be a much needed “solution to feeding the world's population, which is expected to skyrocket from 7 billion today to 10 billion by 2050” (Potenza, par. 5). In order for the public to establish the idea that GMOs are safe, the government will provide funds to pay for a series of initiatives to educate the public on the safety of GMOs. This would include a unit about genetically modified organisms in schools, scientist endorsements, and posters and pamphlets in grocery stores.

The general public often portrays Genetically Modified Organisms in a negative light. People have been displeased with the massive incorporation of GMOs into our modern methods of food production and demand the incorporation of labels which would cost the U.S. millions of dollars (since GM Foods and Non-GM Foods aren’t sorted separately) in an attempt to avoid the consumption of this technological advancement. These people’s concerns regarding GM Foods are understandable, as there have been some research that correlates GMOs with an increase in allergic reaction and cross pollination. However, these concerns often turn into fanaticism, a result of a lack of knowledge in regards to the benefits that GMOs pose. Although Portrayed negatively by the media, Genetically Modified Organisms/Genetically Modified Foods pose a variety of food that will help sustain the world’s exponential population growth.

Audience: Speech class of students ranging from freshman to seniors, some may have prior knowledge of GMOs.