The Environmental Protection Agency ( Usda Crops ( Gm Crops )

1123 Words5 Pages
Humans have been genetically modifying crops (GM crops) since the beginning of agriculture. From domesticating wild grasses, which would become the modern staple grains of today, to breeding the best seeds of fruit in order to produce a larger and sweeter yield. Dr. Nina V. Fedoroff, a biology professor and ex-science/technology advisor to the Secretary of State, does not deny the benefits of GM crops in her article “Engineering Food for All”. Fedoroff provides credible and convincing evidence for easing current strict federal regulation of GM crops. According to Fedoroff, the declining supply of food due to global warming and an increasing population will produce a high demand for sustenance in the coming years (par. 1). In order to meet…show more content…
12). Given the evidence, Fedoroff argues that “the three United States regulatory agencies” should loosen the rains on “the development of genetically modified crops” especially if no “evidence of harm” exists (Fedoroff, par. 13-14). Fedoroff effectively foreshadows to her topic and stance with the title of her article “Engineering Food for All.” The word “Engineering” may relate to a scientific term, and the addition of “Food for All” prepares the reader to piece together science with food in order to benefit the greater population. Dr. Nina V. Fedoroff, starts out by displaying her political background by alluding to President Obama’s initiative to “stimulate innovation by eliminating unnecessary regulation,” and her disagreement with the EPA “choking off innovation” with more GM crop regulation (par. 2). Fedoroff then shows her biological knowledge throughout the article by providing the reader with brief, but effective scientific information about the benefits of genetically modifying crops. For example Fedoroff states, “The induction of mutations in plants...improve yields [of crops]” (par. 3). Fedoroff structures her article by first providing the supporting facts, and then finishes with her two thesis arguments. The first argues for federal agencies to loosen regulation on the “development of genetically modified crops,” and to only worry about the negative side effects “if any” from
Open Document