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.
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.
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.
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
November 6, 2013: “Voters Reject Labels for Genetically Engineered Food in Washington State Today” - The New York Times. June 4, 2013: “Monsanto Sued Over Genetically Modified Wheat” - USA Today. November 4, 2013: “Washington Voters Weigh The Ethics of Genetically Modified Foods” - The Washington Post.
...odified foods throughout the world. There has been much debate over whether or not genetically modified foods are good or bad for our health, the environment, and society. Ever since genetic engineering has allowed humans to modify our food, there has been a wide variety of opinions about GM foods. Genetically modified foods will always be a concern no matter what we know they do positively and negatively because you cannot please everyone.
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.
In a world where healthy eating is always a fad, GMO Labeling is a hot topic. There are several misconceptions about GMOs. Products containing GMO's should be appropriately labeled because inappropriate marketing strategies could defer possible consumers, appropriate labels could help advocate understanding that GMO is not a negative additive and consumers have the right to know what is in their food. A GMO is defined as “an organism whose genome has been altered by the techniques of genetic engineering so that it’s DNA contains one or more genes not normally found there.” Research involving human consumption in GMOs has been in place since 1980, the FDA approved funding for GMOs in 1982. Even though they were approved in 1882, products containing GMOs did not hit grocery stores until late 1994.
“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.
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 Organisms (GMO/s) have evolved enormously during the last decade. With the evolution of GMOs, comes the natural argument for and against them. Most of the arguments that are taking place are directed towards the health of human beings. It is still unsure what the long-term effects of consuming GMOs will have on humans, but only time will tell (Nodoushani, Sintay, & Stewart, 2015, p. 139). Other arguments that are being made are the effects that GMOs will have on the environment as well as the argument of requiring labeling of all Genetically Modified Foods. In this paper, I will discuss the benefits of Genetically Modified Organisms which include the health benefits, environmental benefits and the benefits of labeling,
Genetically modified foods are a controversial subject in today’s society. A genetically modified food is the result of biotechnological procedures that allow the genetic makeup of a food or organism to be altered in some way. They benefit the human race in many ways but they also pose many risks to the health of humans and the good of the environment. There is currently not enough proof to ensure the safety of these genetically modified products. Consuming these genetically altered and more processed foods can lead to increased
Today there are many definitions of Genetic Engineering, such as “Genetic Engineering is a laboratory technique used by scientists to change the DNA of living organisms” (Kowalski) and “Genetic Engineering refers to the modification or manipulation of a living organism’s genes” (Genetic). No matter the wording all definitions of genetic engineering refers to somehow changing an organism’s genetic identity. Many people today support genetic engineering because it has many potential benefits for today's society; however, it also has many potential threats associated with it. Because of the potential threats many people advocate for putting labels on food and products that have been genetically modified, which is why despite many potential benefits associated with genetic engineering, regulations need to be placed upon it as well as labels identifying organisms and food as genetically modified because consumers have the right to know what they are purchasing and eating.
Genetically modified foods is one of the most controversial issues around the world. GMOs (genetically modified foods) are defined as organisms that have had their genetic materials altered in a way that does not occur in nature. Doing this is supposed to improve both the quality and shelf life of most agricultural products. GMO’s have spread worldwide concern with both health and environmental effects. Both of these concerns brought up a lot of controversy. People across the world are asking questions on the environmental and health effects that these foods will have on us and the world we live in. There are both advantages and disadvantages that genetically modified foods will have on our country.
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are becoming a greatly debated topic in many countries. New Zealand, Switzerland, France, and Japan are just a few of the countries that have decided to ban the use of GMOs. Genetically modified organisms are organisms that have been scientifically altered through their DNA. The controversy arising from the use of GMOs is whether they are safe enough to use long-term. Since GMOs have only recently come into our food supply, not enough long term research has been acquired to determine the effects it has on our society. There are many different views on the disputed topic of genetically modified organisms, but the three main views are to ban GMOs completely, to use GMOs without restriction, and to use GMOs in our food supply but regulate and label them.
If crops were affected by droughts, disease and insects, having destroyed many acres across America’s Midwest region, the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) would not be beneficial in regenerating new crops. Genetically modifying foods (GMOs) “are plants or animals that have been genetically engineered with DNA from bacteria, viruses or other plants and animals that cannot occur in nature or in traditional crossbreeding” (nongmoproject.org). Most research done has concluded no positive benefits in using GMOs. There are serious health risks associated with eating GM foods based on scientific research done around the world. The purpose of GMOs are to increase production of crop yield and reduce pesticide use but research says otherwise. If farmers wanted to continue using GMOs to produce crops, labeling should be mandatory to allow consumers to have a conscious choice whether or not to eat GM food. Through research it has been proven that the use of GMOs to increased production of crops during a time of drought or disease have no benefits, just risks.