Nuclear Power Over Our Environment

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

“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.

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.

In conclusion, GMOs and pesticides are harmful and alarming to producers and consumers. They cause animals pain and harm humans when consumed. Many animals live short and painful lives, while humans now must suffer with long term diseases or damage to their bodies. Although some argue that Genetically modified produce is benefiting producers and consumers, I still argue that genetically modified organisms harm animals and

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

For years, the plants that are native to Hawai‘i have been endangered by the world’s newest and greatest inventions that come out every so often. An advanced science, well known as GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms) has recently struck our islands within the turn of the century, creating a drastic revision to our social structure. It has changed the way food is viewed and consumed all over the world, but particularly here in our home. This outburst of Genetically Engineered (GE) products has not only brought forth concerns regarding health risks but it has also caused a questioning to our government, and our agencies that approve these products to be produced on a mass scale.

A genetically modified organism, GMO, has been altered by genetic engineering techniques. GMOs are widely used by scientists in many different ways to include the production of food and in research.8 Zebrafish genetically modified to be a fluorescent bright red, green and orange have been available for purchase as pets in 49 states in the United States since 2003.8 However, these patented GloFish are banned in California. The California Fish and Game Commission decided the fish were the result of a “trivial use for a powerful technology.”7 The Commission’s belief that the fish should not have been created led to a law making the GloFish illegal. Originally GloFish were developed by scientists in Singapore to be living pollution sensors as they would only glow when in the presence of pollutants.7 The Commission’s ban on GloFish highlights the controversy over genetically modified organisms and how public opinion can be swayed by the beliefs of others whether those beliefs are based on science or not. This paper will focus first on what genetic modification means and then will look at the pros and cons of genetically modified foods. Finally, the author’s opinion of the issue of GMO food will conclude the paper.

The United States of America’s population constitutes just 5% of the world’s population, yet it consumes nearly 24% of the world’s energy. Because of our huge consumption of energy, we harm our environment in different ways, like producing massive amounts CO2 emissions which have catastrophic effects, such as climate change, that directly impact us and the different forms of life around us. To cut down on these negative effects, researchers have developed more environmentally friendly methods of energy production. The debate now centers around which energy method is better than the rest. Although there are many energy-generating methods, we will focus on renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power, as well as nuclear power. Shrader-Frechette opposes nuclear energy because it 's seen as unclean, expensive, and dangerous. Senator Lamar Alexander opposes wind and solar energies because the sheer amount of space required by these energy producing methods does more harm to our environment than good. Even if Shrader is right about the disadvantages of nuclear power, which she is not, its worldwide use as our main source of energy would pose an insignificant threat compared to the dangers of the impact solar and wind power would have on the environment. We have no time to experiment with visionary energy sources; civilization is in imminent danger and has to use nuclear power -- the one relatively safe, available, energy source -- now or suffer the pain soon to be

No scientific consensus has proven on GMO safety. Eating GMO corn and consuming trace levels of Monsanto's Roundup chemical fertilizer caused rats to develop horrifying tumors, widespread organ damage, and premature death. That's the conclusion of a shocking new study that looked at the long-term effects of consuming Monsanto's genetically modified corn. Those rats became so fat that I could not tell where the paws were. I hate rats but when I looked at that poor animal-it just hurt. “ Many of the genetically modified foods will be safe I’m sure. Will most of them be safe? Nobody knows.” says Jeremy Rifkin. Even critics of GMO food is untested the long term effects unknown. Animas have been dying of organ change after eating GMO foods. We’ve all seen science fiction movies that feature monsters created when lab experiments go wrong. What happens if our GM foods turn into “Frankenfoods”? Scientists worry that the process of creating genetically-modified plants could lead to new allergens, carcinogens, nutritional deficiencies, and toxins that we’re unprepared to confront. It’s taken us decades to clean up after toxins like lead and asbestos, and those were known elements. How are we prepared to deal with the side effects of

…a well-publicized study sharply criticized by industry found that rats fed GMO corn developed tumors and organ damage. Moreover, new questions continue to emerge.

GMO foods have become overpopulated inside of grocery stores. These foods that are against the natural way of producing food have been forced upon the shelves and consumed by most consumers. Consequently, the United States does not make it mandatory to label our food as a GMO or non-GMO. Our government continues to force the consumer to eat GMO foods that might possibly change the genetic and chemical makeup of humans. Since the government funds and controls these modified seeds, and because the consumer is not educated enough about the potential risks about the foods in which they consume, they continue to pollute their bodies with the GMO foods that are being forced on the supermarket shelves across the country.

“For soy and sugar beet [crops], in 2013 genetically modified varieties represented over 90% of the total [of American soybean and sugarbeet crops]; for maize and cotton it was exactly 90%.” Genetically modified organisms, or commonly abbreviated GMOs, are plants that have had their DNA genetically altered to create amicable, or abolish undesirable traits. As previously said in the statistic sourced from gmo-compass.org, GMOs are dominant to their counter-product, organic foods. On the topic, many effects are produced from GMOs, not only health effects upon the consumer, but economic effects, and inflated population rates. Elaborating upon the the economic, as well as population effect, GMOs are modified to have a higher production rate per plant, making them cheaper to produce, and inevitably cheaper in market stocks. Populations tend to increase dramatically from a higher food supply accommodating the demands for a constant flow of food, and expansion of that flow. Alternatively, many concerns come from the beneficiary health and risks that accompany manipulated organisms. Two key consternations derive from allergies developed from GMOs, and linkage to disease in humans. Other external arguments concur with the controversy of adjusted genes. Examples of this is questioning the morality of permuting natural substances for the selfishness of mankind, as well as the destruction of biodiversity. Theoretically, with support from a variety of different sources, genetically

Through media and social sources, the controversy surrounding genetically modified crops has increased greatly over the last decade. Left-wing individuals, the UCS (Union of Concerned Scientists), and many organic/all natural advocates are the leading cause for the hesitation when it comes to GMO’s. The USC is a nonprofit organization that includes many private citizens as well as professional scientists that attempt to solve pressing global problems. Many organic advocates are against GMO because of the idea that the manipulation of the crops is affecting it’s

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

Claim: The U.S. government allowing untested and unsafe genetically modified products of agriculture to be released onto the market is threatening to society.