Genetically modified organism are becoming more common in our super markets due to advancements in research and because of the ease and economic value of growing genetically modified crops rather than organic or non-genetically modified crops. The majority of crops like corn and soy are genetically modified which leads to confusion about the impact of the genetically modified foods on our environment, our bodies and the bodies of livestock and animals. The debate that is occurring in many states including Colorado is whether to label food products containing genetically modified ingredients. The debate is inherent to the conservation of natural food products while also implying an excess of legislation on the state. Conservationists focus on the proper use of nature, which leads me to wonder why the conservation movement hasn’t weighed in on the production of genetically modified crops. I wonder if these genetically modified crops are affecting not only the crop and individual ingesting the crop but the environment surround the GM crop that isn’t involved in the growing at all. Is the development of genetically modified crops good for the conservation and preservation of the surrounding environment and the food itself? The development and the act growing of genetically modified crops changes the plant from its ”proper” use. In a time before genetically modified crops were as common as they are today, the use of the crop was to feed a person or use in a way to gain money. It was the responsibility of other aspects of crop growing to deter pests and keep the plant healthy. Genetically modified crops and foods are now coupled with the “proper” use of the crop and responsible for the other phase of growing crops. Many ecologists b... ... middle of paper ... ... growing of genetically modified foods may be damaging the environment and the ecosystem but when it comes to the labeling debate my opinion is a solid no despite the fears and unknown that are associated with the food. The debate over labeling genetically modified foods in Colorado revolves around the economic, health and consumer choice aspects of GM foods. Although studies have shown that consumers support the labeling of GM foods, studies have also shown that the consumers are unwilling to pay the premium that is coupled with labeling of genetically modified foods. The conservation of natural foods is one of the things that I think about when trying to decide if the legislation that is being enacted on us is the right amount or excessive. I believe that any kind of legislation increase on the subject of genetically modified foods is unnecessary and excessive.
A non-GMO label doesn’t necessarily mean “healthy”. White sugar, flour, and processed ingredients if not genetically modified are considered non GMO. Recently Cheerios made their ingredients GMO free. This label made Cheerios seems as a “healthy conscience choice” when in fact they are not healthy at all. The truth is that this breakfast cereal is highly processed and is best to be avoided despite the “healthy halo” of being approved by the National Heart Association and GMO free. The truth appears on the nutrition label and the ingredients (Wartman). “If you can’t pronounce it, don’t buy it” The voluntary labeling places a burden on the consumer. The average Americans are forced to navigate confusing and cluttered food landscape” (Wartman). A mandatory labeling law is vital to give clear and concise information to citizens.
A debate is ragging over the advancements being made in genetic engineering. Scientist discovered that genes are the map of every aspect of a living organism, this has furthermore led to the prospect of altering this coding. By modifying one’s genes parents will one day be able to pick the color of their unborn child’s eyes and farmers will have the ability to develop plants that will produce bigger and healthier harvest. With the growing anticipation that some feel towards genetically modified crops others question it effects on the surrounding environments. Often pesticides are more heavily relied on for genetically modified crops and some cases have found pollination decreased in areas dominated by GM plants. Since there are so many aspects of genetic modification that have yet to be explored, much more research is required before distributing GM seeds internationally, but from the information already available the sides have begun to divide.
Some people have raised concerns to the topic about genetically modified foods, but there are pros and cons to both sides. People worry about their lives being in danger from consuming genetically modified foods and the allergic
Until the government creates mandates for issuing labels on foods that contain genetically modified ingredients, there are measures that can be taken by common citizens and supporters of GMO labeling in order to keep Americans safe in the meantime. Since “study after study points to potential health risks” (“Whole Foods Market”), supporters need to raise awareness amongst the rest of society in order to generate a large group that can begin to press the government to create a law to handle the issue. It is in “the state’s interest [to] protect consumers from false or potentially misleading communication or prevent consumers from suffering unwitting harms” (Adler). Moreover, the government must be the one to put an official end to the lack of
Bronner’s raised in 1.15 million dollars to support food labeling. Unfortunately, supporters of the cause are greatly outnumbered by their opponents. Monsanto raised four million dollars in opposition to mandate labeling. In spite of the supporters passionate efforts, GMO labeling most likely would not be the solution that activists and consumers are looking for. “Approximately ⅔ of the foods and beverages we buy and consume would be exempt. Meat and dairy products would be exempt even if they come from animals raised on GMO feed and grain. All alcoholic beverages, food for immediate consumption served in restaurants and other institutions would also be exempt, even if they contain GMO ingredients” (Review Of Proposition). With laws like these, information on GMOs that affect the majority of the people that care about taking these precautions will not be available. The facts that the labeling laws will mandate will be so vague that they will not provide anymore information than companies that label their product with non-GMO or organic. Any label mandated product under Proposition 105 would not have to inform the consumer of what percentage of the product was genetically modified and what ingredients in the food were genetically modified (Review of
Genetically modified foods have a huge impact on our environment. One way that genetically modified foods are hurting our environment is that process can involve the exchange of genes between two totally different species. People are actually putting scorpion toxin into corn and fish antifreeze into tomatoes (De Greef). These changes in the plants make the plant able to with stand the attack of pests and weather, but it is still possible that the plant’s DNA will cross and make bad toxins. If a farmer plants a crop that has the resistance to herbicides, drought, cold, and pests those plants can eventually cross with weeds and then the farmer will end up with weeds that are resistant to everything too. Then the scientists will end up having to make the plants stronger to fight off the weeds, then the weeds will get stronger, and the cycle will keep on going. Another argument for the ban of...
Genetically modified foods are developed by combining genes from two different organisms which alters it's DNA and do not occur naturally. Biotechnology is relatively new so like most people, I turned to research to argue this issue with facts. In my opinion, genetically modifying foods have more harmful effects than they do beneficial. I am against their use because it creates safety risks for our health and animals, it can damage the environment and we have to deal with the total costs.
Food is an essential part of everyday life without it one could not survive. Every day we make choices on what we put in to our bodies. There are countless varieties of food to choose from to meet the diverse tastes of the increasing population. Almost all food requires a label explaining the ingredients and the nutritional value allowing consumers to make informed decisions on what they are consuming. However, many may not be considering where that food is coming from or how it has been produced. Unfortunately, there is more to food than meets the eye. Since 1992, “ the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ruled, based on woefully limited data, that genetically modified foods were ‘substantially equivalent’ to their non-GM counterparts” (Why to Support Labeling). GM food advocates have promised to create more nutritious food that will be able to grow in harsh climate conditions and eventually put an end to world hunger in anticipation of the growing population. There is very little evidence to support these claims and study after study has proven just the opposite. GM crops are not only unsafe to consume, but their growing practices are harmful to the environment, and multinational corporations are putting farmers out of business.
In an article titled “The Threats From Genetically Modified Foods” by Robin Mather, he has said that the use of glyphosate, a herbicide, can “significantly increase the severity of various plant diseases” which is very hazardous to the environment. In the same article “The Threats From Genetically Modified Foods” Robin Mather has stated that genetic transfers cannot occur in nature and are not so precise and predictable as people say they are. In another article called “Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering” from Issues & Controversies, it has been shown that genetic modification can affect many plants. For instance, the article stated that In Oregon, there was genetically modified grass that had affected plants nearby which began to ruin all of the crops near the genetically modified
GMOs can also bear consequences in terms of genetic pollution and alteration, from contamination and mutation to adaptation to evolution to species extinction. Indeed, some claims are not well supported and may require testing, like genetic alteration through consumption or the validity of correlating animal health deficits with GM feeds. However, overall, GM foods clearly affect the world negatively in terms of biodiversity and ecosystem impacts. With all of the controversy surrounding GMO foods: health versus biodiversity; benefits versus dangers; pros versus cons, a topic that always arises is the subject of labeling. Labeling has been a matter of discussion for years and surprisingly, it is a hot debate that is still full of life.
...M crops will escalate the cost of farming, causing many small farmers to potentially loose their businesses. As GMOs continue to affect human life and the environment, it should be mandatory for products to be labeled if they are genetically modified, thus giving consumers the right to make their own decision. With the list of health risks and environmental issues rising, the use of GMOs should be banned as a method to increase food supply and continue a natural approach to eliminate all risks.
The labeling of food made with genetically modified plants and produced from animals fed with genially modified food is completely voluntary. So basically the American consumer has no way to make informed choices. If by any chance any of these products cause adverse side effects in the future Americans are completely at the mercy of the retailers. The public has no way to make informed decisions of whether they want to eat genetically modified food or not. Upon further research I found out that there are over 40 plants varieties that have completed the federal requirement for commercialization. These approvals include foods with drugs in them, fish, fruits and nuts that mature faster, and plants that produce plastics. (NERC 2005)
“Genetically modified foods are a "Pandora's box" of known and unknown risks to humans and the environment. They have been forced onto the American public by multinational biotech and agribusiness corporations without adequate oversight and regulation by the United States government (Driscoll, SallyMorley, David C).”Genetically Modified Food is food which has been chemically altered by scientists during the production process to give the food more nutrients, better appearance, and a longer shelf-life (Rich, Alex K.Warhol, Tom). The importance of this issue is that these GMO’s can actually have a negative effect in our society in general. It could mutate in a negative way and cause cancer or other diseases. Genetically modified food should be strictly controlled due to its various detrimental effects on the environment, human health, and potentially insect/animal effects.
Genetically modified food’s, or GMOs, goal is to feed the world's malnourished and undernourished population. Exploring the positive side to GMOs paints a wondrous picture for our planet’s future, although careful steps must be taken to ensure that destruction of our ecosystems do not occur. When GMOs were first introduced into the consumer market they claimed that they would help eliminate the world’s food crisis by providing plants that produced more and were resistant to elemental impacts like droughts and bacterial contaminants, however, production isn’t the only cause for the world’s food crisis. Which is a cause for concern because the population on the earth is growing and our land and ways of agriculture will not be enough to feed everyone sufficiently. No simple solutions can be found or applied when there are so many lives involved. Those who are hungry and those who are over fed, alike, have to consider the consequences of Genetically Modified Organisms. Food should not be treated like a commodity it is a human necessity on the most basic of levels. When egos, hidden agendas, and personal gains are folded into people's food sources no one wins. As in many things of life, there is no true right way or wrong way to handle either of the arguments and so many factors are involved that a ‘simple’ solution is simply not an option.
Scientists have been changing genomes of plants and animals by integrating new genes from a different species through genetic engineering, creating a genetically modified organism (GMO). Consumers in America have been eating GMOs since 1996, when they went on the market. There are benefits to genetically modifying crop plants, as it improves the crop quality and increases yield, affecting the economy and developing countries. But there are also negative effects from GMOs. Consumption of GMOs has various health effects on both body systems of animals and humans. GMOs also affect the environment, ecosystems and other animal species. The cons outweigh the pros in the case of GMOs.