More handpicked essays just for you.
Genetically modified organisms in our world today
Genetically modified organisms in our world today
Genetically modified organisms in our world today
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In animal agriculture today, manure that is produced by hogs has the potential to do a lot of damage in the form of pollution; but rather than let this abundant resource go to waste, why not just fix it? Enviropig—a genetically modified hog programmed to have reduced levels of phosphorus in its feces— could be one of the first steps toward fertilizer that won’t have as large of an impact on our planet, while keeping our crops growing and our store shelves stocked. I believe that this transgenic animal provides our farmers with the best of both worlds: reducing their environmental footprint and maintaining economic stability; although its production is controversial, the moral obligation to do our best to keep our planet fit for future generations …show more content…
These reseachers extracted the Escherichia coli gene that produces phytase in E. Coli bacteria and attached this gene to a Mus musculus—house mouse—gene called a parotid secretory protein promoter. This mouse gene is a protein associated with secreting digestive enzymes from the salivary glands of mice, and can be used in pigs in the same fashion; by linking these two genes together and inserting it into the genome of a pig, the scientists hypothesized that a transgenic pig should have the ability to secrete the E. Coli phytase enzyme in their saliva to break down phytate into accessible phosphorous. These researchers tested their hypothesis by producing 33 transgenic piglets, 14 of which were capable of producing significant amounts of phytase in their salivary glands. These piglets were then crossed to make subsequent generations for transgenic pigs, which had an even higher capability to produce salivary phytase. These pigs were then tested on their ability to utilize phytase by testing the concentration of phosphorus in their feces. Transgenic pigs in …show more content…
As long as all dietary safety measures are met completely, the moral obligation to preserving our planet for future generations is, in my opinion. far greater than any potential moral issues that arise in the creation of this organism.
In conclusion, Enviropig is a genetically modified organism created through the infusion of E. Coli phytase—linked to a salivary secretory gene of Mus musculus, the house mouse—into the genetic sequence of the common pig. By doing this these pigs are now able to break down their main source of dietary phosphorus, phytate, and subsequently excrete nearly 70% less fecal phosphorus for no increased agricultural cost. The main issues associated with this transgenic organism lie in the complicated safety testing that would need to be performed and the public perception of ingesting meat that has been modified in any way, as well as the moral issues that arise with altering animal design. In my opinion, however, the moral obligation to decrease mankind’s negative impact on Earth is of greater importance than these moral issues, and Enviropig is a great asset in fixing many of our problems with pollution and climate
In his article “Boss Hog: The Dark Side of America’s Top Pork Producer,” (Rolling Stone Magazine, December 14, 2006) Jeff Teitz reports that not only are millions upon millions of pigs being abused and slaughtered each year by America’s largest pork producer, but, in turn, the waste produced by those pigs is polluting, destroying, and even killing others. Teitz begins by revealing that Smithfield Foods, the world’s most profitable pork processor, killed 27 million hogs last year, which is roughly equivalent to the entire human populations of America’s thirty-two largest cities. As Teitz delves deeper into statistics, he explains that more fecal matter is produced from half a million pigs at one Smithfield subsidiary than the 1.5 million residents of Manhattan, and in just one year Smithfield’s total waste discharge is enough to fill four Yankee Stadiums.
We care so much about what the food is and how it is made that we overlook about where the food had come from. According to the reading selection, “Killing Them with Kindness?” by James McWilliams, an American history professor at Texas State University, states “animals raised in factory farms have qualities that make them worthy of our moral consideration…[and yet, we] continue to ignore the ethical considerations involved in eating meat” (311). This exhibits that when Americans are so engrossed in healthy eating, our morals about animal rights are neglected. Most of what we eat are animals, and animals like we do have emotions, interests, and possibly goals in life. We pay no heed of the animal’s interests and it should not be that way since our interests are no more important just because we are more superior, intelligent beings should not give us the right to perceive animals in such a manner. In addition to paying notice of the origin of where the animals come from, we need to be aware of what killing animals will do to the earth. In the TedTalk, “What’s Wrong with the Way We Eat,” Mark Bittman states “10 billion animals are killed each year for food and they represent 18% of the harmful greenhouse gasses” (Bittman). This reveals that our careless consumption would not only lead to the suffering of animal deaths but the suffering of our world and our imminent death. As we increase our progression with our unhealthy obsession over healthy eating, there will not be any positive effects for the body, the animals around us, or the world. If we were to be conscious about the source of our food and the consequence of eating then we will be able to eat healthily and
Monsanto Company notes that there has been a 12 % population growth over the past decade, leading to higher food demands. The need for stronger fertilizers to sustain high quality products and improved production is critical. Monsanto Company’s products continue to receive widespread criticism and rejection despite their world domination. For instance, in a research by Heinemann, animals fed with genetically modified products were different from those fed with conventional feeds (2). This research provided concrete evidence on genetic modification of these animals
...y cattle are responsible for the largest amount of manure production amongst farm animals (see Table 1) (para. ).
In 2012, the global are of genetically modified crops continued to increase for the 17th year in a row at a rate of 6% (25 million acres). The area of genetically modified crops, or biotech crops, has increased almost 100-fold since commercialization in 1996, making biotech crops the fastest adopted crop technology in the history of modern agriculture (“ISAAA”). The biotech boom has changed the way that producers grow their crops, for better or for worse. The explosion of genetically modified crops and foods has stirred a debate whether they are a harmful liability to the environment and to society or they are a beneficial, new technology that can help provide food to the rapidly increasing world population.
Throughout “The Omnivore's Dilemma” Pollan makes it evident that the overall callous nature of the meat industry, harsh living conditions, and the brutal deaths of animals are all in the name of pleasure. Although, He makes good claims as to how these realities of this industry are justified but essentially it is clear that indulging in meat products does sacrifice morals. Morals you may or may not have depending on one's stance on ethics involving the consumption of animals.
The long-term aim is to develop an approach to ethics that will help resolve contemporary issues regarding animals and the environment. In their classical formulations and as recently revised by animal and environmental ethicists, mainstream Kantian, utilitarian, and virtue theories have failed adequately to include either animals or the environment, or both. The result has been theoretical fragmentation and intractability, which in turn have contributed, at the practical level, to both public and private indecision, disagreement, and conflict. Immensely important are the practical issues; for instance, at the public level: the biologically unacceptable and perhaps cataclysmic current rate of species extinctions, the development or preservation of the few remaining wilderness areas, the global limitations on the sustainable distribution of the current standard of living in the developed nations, and the nonsustainability and abusiveness of today's technologically intense crop and animal farming. For individuals in their private lives, the choices include, for example: what foods to eat, what clothing to wear, modes of transportation, labor-intensive work and housing, controlling reproduction, and the distribution of basic and luxury goods. What is needed is an ethical approach that will peacefully resolve these and other quandaries, either by producing consensus or by explaining the rational and moral basis for the continuing disagreement.
All of the livestock being raised throughout the world produce enormous amounts of manure and urine, which in turn pollute natural resources. Animal waste changes the pH of our water, contaminates our air; and the gases emitted are believed to be a major cause of global warming. To keep costs down, the modern animal farming practice is to raise livestock in feedlots and factory farms where thousands or tens of thousands of animals are crowded into small spaces. However, this makes the animal waste problem worse because of concentrated waste. Livestock in the U.S. produce 2.7 trillion pounds of manure each year. That’s about ten times more waste than was produced by all the American
Problems in our world are sometimes more complicated then diagnosis and treatment, some are interactions of ourselves and the world around us. Global warming is an example, as it increasing begins to change the climate, humans need to adjust to prevent our health from deteriorating. Today though our bodies rely on our own modifications to keep up with the rapid change; genetic engineering of ourselves and world has allowed humans to overcome challenges nature throws at us. Humans today must quickly adapt to the new demands and availabilities in our world. If humans were able to make modifications such that our bodies could reject most meats, we would be less reliant on the huge industries that contribute much of the greenhouse gas emissions, also we could avoid contaminants that make us sick. Livestock farming causes 51% of worlds’ greenhouse gas and causes deforestation in order to provide room for the animals. Whether by taking pills or changing the whole DNA sequence from birth, we could make...
...f the human beings!. Moreover, genetic modification affect the environment negatively, ”Genetically modified corn and soybeans appear in everything from high fructose corn syrup to soy milk, there is no way to get it out of the food chain now.” (Hatch, R.H, 2010) .
There is much to be said about how exactly meat is being produced. In the present day, there are hardly any farms out there that still practice the traditional and environmental - friendly way. Animal agriculture is widely used all over the world and greatly contributes to climate change. Meat production leads to global warming because of the combination of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. The process of raising animal is the major source to these harmful gases. It is vital to save the world from the worst impacts of climate change by reducing meat consumption. However stopping this meat eating system is extremely difficult, given that we had been consuming meat ever since our ancestors domesticated animals for that purpose. Over the decade Animal agriculture has been getting worse and worse. In 1973 when the Secretary of Agriculture Earl Butz announced ‘’ what we want out of agriculture is plenty of food’’, overproduction was encouraged and lowering the price of meat was carried out; this originally started when there was a massive increase in corn (Wolfson). In order to keep up this mass production of meat, multiple pounds of grains are fed to livestock. Livestock industries depended on corn and soy based food and used over half of the artificial fertilizer used in the United States (McWilliams).
Meat cultivation uses more land, water and resources to house, transport, and slaughter animals and their grain and food than it would cost to fund in vitro meat studies. In April 2008 the In Vitro Consortium first met at the Norwegian Food Research Institute. The consortium is “an international alliance of environmentally concerned scientists striving to facilitate the establishment of a large scale process industry for the production of muscle tissue for human consumption through concerted R&D efforts and attraction of funding fuels to these efforts. ”Meat in both its production and its consumption has a number of destructive effects on not only the environment and humans but also live stock. Some of these effects are antibiotic resistant bacteria due to the overuse of antibiotics in livestock, meat-borne pathogens (e. coli), and diseases associated with diets rich in animal fats (diabetes).
...e Animals and Satisfy Meat Eaters?” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 21.6 (2008): 580-96. Web. 3 Apr. 2014.
America focuses heavily on its livestock and crops earning us a major role in global trade as a farming nation. Unfortunately this has led to some poor choices in treatment of our animals. Many farmers who believe in animal rights say that it started back when farmers only tended to fewer animals, “Ownership of farm animals became concentrated in fewer hands, and flocks and herds grew larger. As a result, the individuality of animals was lost to their owners and they began receding from most people's everyday life” (Namit 29). When people lost their connection to the animals that provided their food, the quality of the animal's lives began to dramatically decrease. Consumers constantly pushed farmers to their limits with high quotas. To keep up with demands agriculturalists turned to some unorthodox practices to keep costs low and still maintain their annual quotas; “To raise efficiency and cut costs, farm animals began to be engineered for abnormally rapid weight gain, fed unnatu...
“I always knew that becoming a vegetarian would help prevent cruelty to animals but I was not aware of the environmental consequences of a meat-eating diet.” writes Lillie Ogden, a writer for the popular recipe magazine, Vegetarian Times. The first part of her statement, about “cruelty to animals” is a familiar argument, and generally the one that surrounds the case for adopting a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle. However, this exhausted argument is ineffective in actually changing anyone’s eating habits. You can show me as many videos of suffering farm animals as you want, but that argument isn’t going to change the fact that at the end of the day I’m still going to enjoy a juicy, medium-rare steak. The reason being isn’t that I’m not a empathetic person or that I