The 's Health And The General Economy

“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.

Primarily, GMOs can accidentally contaminate crops near them and affect production for independent or local farmers and the companies themselves. As chemicals were scientifically introduced to these crops, their properties may affect production for others as invasive crops, causing the companies to pay additional fees. It is a controversial issue within the discussion due to how, “…independent farmers’ crops can be damaged by neighboring GM crops. When this happens, they must pay fees or risk being sued.” (Brassard 1). As it is demonstrated by the author GMOs may be a liability for production and it may cause more issues than necessary. On the other hand, genetically modified foods can resist weather patterns

Recently, delegates of famine stricken Southern African nations and representatives from the United States and the European Union came together to resolve issues regarding the acceptance of Genetically modified Food aid from the United States of America. Concerns and complications stemmed from humanitarian, economical, social and political grounds.

Due to reading “Stuffed and Starved” by Raj Patel this semester, I learned about how foods are produced and impact the world. Ever since I visited the farmer’s market in October, I became more aware of whether or not I am consuming genetically modified crops. Raj Patel revealed some of the many truths about the Green Revolution regarding genetically modified crops that influenced my choice of eating. Prior to reading the section of the book that made me aware of what I am eating, I believed that genetically modified crops were more beneficial than harmful to everyone. Not only did the genetically modified crops produce a higher yield to feed people, but the negative impact of technology outweighed its benefit. For example, Patel states, “domestic

Genetically modified crops are an incredibly important issue that everyone should be aware of since it is something we are exposed to at a daily basis. Genetically modified crops also known as GM crops or Biotech crops has been one of the most heated debates of issues within our society. The debate about the safety, concerns and disadvantages of GM crops have raged since the mid 1990 's but this is due to the lack of knowledge of the general public. Many people are unaware of what the GM crops actually are and what they offer. Genetically modified crops are plants that are used in the agriculture and have been modified to initiate a new trait to plants that does not happen naturally in the species. These plants are modified using genetic engineering techniques to enhance desired traits. GM crops are made when genes of commercial interest are transferred from one organism to another.() There are many methods used for the production of GM crops but the two primary used for plant insertion are gene guns and agrobacterium tumefaciens. There are also three types of modifications which are transgenic, cisgenic, and subgenic plants. However, there are a number of issues that surround this controversial topic such as environmental, health, and economic concerns. Even though there are some worrying facts about GM crops people don 't realize the advantages or the ways it has helped humans as well as animals. There are many reasons why GM crops are proven

John Robbins, author of The Food Revolution states that “if genetically engineered plants were designed to reverse world hunger, you would expect them to bring higher yields. But there is increasing evidence that they do just the opposite”. Numerous studies have shown that GM crops do not have a higher yield production, but in fact have at times shown a lower outcome. In 2000, “research done by the University of Nebraska found the yields of GE soybeans were six to eleven percent lower than conventional plants” (Robbins). Evidence that GM foods are not the answer to world hunger continues to pile up. Former US EPA and US FDA biotech specialist Dr. Doug Gurian-Sherman acknowledges that GM crops are not beneficial to solving world hunger: “as of this year [2008], there are no commercialized GM crops that inherently increase yield. Similarly, there are no GM crops on the market that were engineered to resist drought, reduce fertilizer pollution or save soil. Not one” (“10 Reasons Why we don’t Need GM Foods”). Genetically modified corn is a product that has been modified to the extreme in recent years. Here, you can clearly see the physical differences between organic and GM corn. In response to Monsanto’s statement, eighteen African delegates clearly objected, noting that it would undermine their capacity to feed

In an ever changing world, there are only a few things that are certain that all people need. It is said that a human can last three minutes without air, three hours without shelter, three days without water, and three weeks without food. The typical American farmer in 2017 feeds about 155 people compared to the 25.8 people in 1960. The thought of genetically modified organisms is nothing more than just a regulatory muddle. Agriculture is such a widely conversed topic however, through extensive research, international experiments, and general education, it is clear that genetically modified organisms (GMO’s) are safe on all aspects as well as necessary to continue to feed the people.

Today’s world is all about how we can be seen as helping others, or how one county is offering support to those in need of it. When Jeremy Seifert starting his work on his film GMO-OMG (Seifert, 2013), the film started by asking people the simple question do they eat GMO. The film goes through the first 2 min of just people responses to that question and it is amazing how people were so unware of what they were eating. GMO are genetically modified organism which as the movie explains there are two primary categories of GMOs, the pesticide producer, and Herbicide resisters (Seifert, 2013) which help farmers to grow crops by making them resistant to bugs or weeds that would have destroyed crops in the past. Monsanto is one of the largest GMO producers of a corn seed that would allow for crops to grow with natural resistant to herbicide and insects. When Jeremy went to Africa to research why some of the locals were rejecting the Monsanto seeds because they said that you could only plant them once and then you would be forever in need of the replace seeds rather than just reusing seeds from the fully grown plants. The Haitian people believed that the seeds of life are a common inheritance of all humanity (Seifert, 2013).

However, these risks are purely speculative: 81 separate studies costing approximately $65 million have been conducted by the European Commission alone and have shown no evidence of any risk linked to GM foods (1). Indeed, the U.S. has concluded that the risk of GM crops is minimal. As a result, in the U.S., genetically altered crops accounted for 93% of planted soybeans and cotton and 86% of corn in 2009. (2). Considering the success and benefits of GM crops in America, developing countries have followed suit. In 2009, India planted 84,000 square kilometers of genetically modified cotton, and Brazil planted 214,000 square kilometers of GM soybeans, a 26% increase from the year before (3). Like the U.S., these countries conducted a risk-benefit analysis and concluded that the economic, health, and food surplus benefits of GM crops offset the unproven risks (4). Thus, agricultural biotechnology is being implemented in farming techniques throughout the world.

Direct effects can limit the surrounding environment's ability to function correctly and alter the overall relationships between organisms. Insects and animals that typically forage on non-GMO crops must rely on other types of nutrients, causing a shift in local food webs and trophic interactions (CITE). Animals living around GMO crop fields must find alternative sources of food that do not contain genetically modified genes. This causes a shift in local food webs and puts stress on the naturally occurring trophic cascades. Crops are also typically nonnative plants that have no close wild relatives, which makes it hard for natural gene flow to occur (Williamson 1992). Plants that naturally breed are hindered by the unnatural presence of GMO

Even then, farmers argued that this crop hybridization was against nature and immoral. However, despite theses claims, corn hybrids proved to be commercially successful for the farmers that used them in their fields (PBS, Genetically Modified Foods). In the United States, genetically modified crops have skyrocketed to 70 million acres since 1996. More than half of US processed grocery products contain gene-altered ingredients. However, Europeans are increasingly opposed to genetically modified crops, The question here lies, why would one nation be supportive enough to have half of its processed grocery products contain GMFs, when another nation forbids these same GMFs to be used? It is all based on perception, and reception of the use and benefits of GMFs.

Most public concern has been focused on human health and safety regarding the use and consumption of these foods, but potential environmental impacts are important to consider as well. Many varieties of genetically engineered crops are intended to decrease the need for chemical pesticides and fertilizers, but the scope of environmental impacts does not stop at chemical usage. Common concerns about GM crops include the effects of cross-pollination, so-called “genetic contamination,” and the escape of GM crops from cultivation and their interactions with native species. Conversely, the environmental benefits of GM crops range from reducing dependence on chemical pesticides to the ability to treat polluted soils with bioremediating plants (Ford, 2004).

“70 percent of our corn farmland and 93 percent of soy farmland are planted with crops genetically engineered to resist pests and herbicides and increase crop yields. 60% of all the processed foods in the United States are genetically modified; a shocking statistic has the concern of many Americans. However, most people are uninformed about the beneficial impact that genetically modified food has on their diet. GM is the use of molecular biology technology to modify the inherited structure of organisms. Genetically engineered crops increase nutrients, drought tolerance, provide more food for growing populations, and resists diseases and pesticides. Genetically engineered foods are crucial to the improvement of economy, agriculture, society, and health choices. The creation of GM foods was one of the most significant breakthroughs in food industry. Genetically modifying foods is a key component that is harmless for the enrichment of our foods.

Since 2.3 billion people will be added to the world from 2009 to 2050, biotechnology- Genetically Modified Organism- is a must to combat the global food crisis(Weisser para. 2). When the United States developed Bt corn, “[they] have been genetically engineered to resist herbicides and pests and even withstand drought.”(para. 16). Unlike corn that have never been modified, the Bt corn were able to survive better because of their resistant to herbicides, pests, and drought; resulting, a corn that can survive in harsh environment. By creating a modified corn that can survive in harsh environment, a large supply of corn- food- can be produced. If biotechnology can genetically modified corn to survive in harsh condition, more food can be produced; resulting 2.3 billion people can be fed; therefore, addressing the global food crisis. To put it briefly, limiting biotechnology would prevent addressing the global food crisis. Not only can genetic engineering address the global food crisis, but it can also improve medicine

In 2002, a scourge of famine and hunger emerged in Southern Africa, threatening the lives of millions while sweeping through the many underdeveloped countries of Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe. This epidemic, induced by drought, economic crises, HIV/AIDS, and high inflation of staple food prices, was addressed in a 2002 conference between the representatives from the United States, European Union, and African Nations. However, this debate encompassed a convoluted friction between proponents of their own respective form of aid. The European Union would offer monetary aid while the United States would offer food aid in the form of genetically modified corn supplied by the US Agency for International Development or USAID. For every moment that had passed in the conference, the plague of hunger, HIV, and an inequitable disarray of food accessibility would further ravage the African countries; therefore, it was crucial to accept the corn as a quick and effective means of relief. In the face of a dilemma of such great magnitude, the African nations had decided to accept the aid from the US delegation in the form of GM cornmeal. The main objective of the aid program was to prevent an African famine on a large scale, while repairing and adjusting the smaller intricacies of the nations. Although the controversy of the GM content in corn would generate an immense burden of apprehension on the shoulders of the African