Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Name
Professor
Course
Date
Introduction
Over the past few years, arguments on the effects of genetically modified organisms have
increasingly taken sides with both supports and opponents justifying their opinions over DNA.
Since GMO has both positive and negative sides, such side-taking is expected where some will
argue for, and others will argue against. GMOs are those organisms that have their structures of
their DNA altered (Bock, Ralph 18). A facile explanation of how organisms are genetically
modified may better be understood with the realization that a rare steak may have hundreds of
trillions of the gene; each containing a code that determines the appearance and characteristics of
a living thing/ Genetic modification changes the genes; hence, the characteristics of the subject
as well. Large corporations such as Coca-Cola has been on the front advocating for the
legalization of the GMO and remove the labeling policy that was internationally passed to make
buyers aware of the GMO content. Since larger corporations keep growing regarding their
manufacturing and production, quite a larger number of consumers and health groups have stood
up fighting against foods that are genetically altered. In this case, the battle raised against
GMO foods has become the center of debate with evidence that negative side outweighs the
positive sides.
The effects of genetic modification in any form are cause for controversy around the
world; although some countries are more accepting than others. The tomato was the first of the
Surname 2
commercially grown GM foods. The food item was named the FlavrSavr and was deemed by
the FDA (The US Foods as well as Drug Administration) to be safe for consumption after testing
in 1992. Surprisingly, though, the FDA did not require the tomato to carry a label stating it had
been genetically modified. In fact, there was little fanfare at all regarding its release to the public;
although many will say that is because the public did not understand the concept of GM and that
In quick succession, some other genetically modified food items began to appear on
grocery store shelves including a potato that had an EPA classified organic pesticide in its
package. It had DNA called Bt that was still not required to carry labeling; virus-resistant'
squash; and several strains of corn, soybeans, cotton and canola that had been engineered with an
modification might be traced to the company Menino; deal with a rich history of United States.
Having been founded late in 1900, it grew into an economic juggernaut that, in the eyes of many,
has made some painful missteps in the public's eyes including the manufacture and sale of DDT
and Agent Orange; both chemicals found to have detrimental effects on human beings.
A series of acquisitions and mergers left Monsanto, the undisputed winner in the field of
genetic modification. By 2007 they owned Cargill and Seminis - former seed companies;
Agracetus, the biotechnology company credited with generating multiple transgenic variations;
and some other transactions; the relevance and value of which are too complicated for a
comprehensive explanation of the parameters of this assignment. However, they may well be
remembered for their attempt to launch a technology called terminator that would create sterile
seeds; thereby protecting what they believed were their intellectual property rights because they
Surname 3
were licensing the technology to farmers. A public outcry finally caused Monsanto to back down
from this proposed monopoly over what would be the key to the worlds food supply.
Meanwhile, there was a growing awareness across the United States, and the world,
throughout the last decade of the 20th century and now into the 21st; that the use of genetic
mushrooming. It thus translated to a growing backlash against the concept and its increasing
applications (Bock, Ralph 15). Those who were against genetic modification had many issues
with artificially engineering food. Their chief concern was that foods were unlabeled, untested
and unsafe. So, on the one hand, organizations that believed genetically modified organisms
were a panacea to solve the problem of world hunger. Conversely, the very nature of these foods
was being called into question about whether or not the essence of their constitution was
authentically safe for consumption (by animals in the form of feed or humans).
The Rockefeller Foundation and golden rice is a perfect example of the conflict.
Scientists employed by the foundation to research solutions to hunger were extremely excited
when they developed a strain of rice they had enriched with vitamin A. There is a decided
Vitamin A deficiency in many third world countries which often results in early blindness, so
scientists were cautiously optimistic they had a breakthrough to their credit. However, despite
the endorsement of multiple organizations (right, some were biotech companies); the food was
ultimately condemned for the reason it had been genetically modified, and people were fearful
In our modern world, it seems not a day goes by that genetically modified organisms, and
plants are not front page news. Monsanto is bearing the brunt of the much negative press that
makes it appear the acceptance of genetically engineered foods across the world is akin to a
Surname 4
soccer match. If the people' speak out and prevent its acceptance into their country, it is much
like a win' for the underdog. Meanwhile, the wealthy and powerful American company is sent
packing time and again. At the very least, that is a fact worth noting; more importantly, though is
this point may bring cooler minds to bear in light of the constant presence of starvation.
At other times, these modifications are creatures altered to a genetic level to contain
genetic materials from random elements. These materials originate from animal categories that
might not be discovered blended with the creature in nature or seen at customary rearing. A case
of this is embedding qualities from a creature into an organic product or vegetable (Katz). To
create these GMOs, researchers use quality weapons (gear for infusing cells with genetic data),
((Bock, Ralph 20). Products are for the most part adjusted so they pick up imperviousness to
conditions that would some way or another murder the harvests or back off the development
procedure. The exploration of hereditarily modifying creatures started in the 1981s; however, the
innovation was not consolidated into the agrarian business to 1983s. Presently GMOs could
usually be found in soybeans, cottonseed, corn, canola, sugar, beets, horse, papaya, feed, and
zucchini (Poulter 191). In spite of the fact that GMOs addressed after adding to the agrarian
market, as of late, a developing number of individuals have been staying away from them or
To begin, many people would prefer not to eat sustenance that has been GMO and
misleadingly changed, and simply need to eat unadulterated and characteristic nourishment.
Furthermore, the seeds of hereditarily built yields can undoubtedly be conveyed the water
however and splash to territories of the non-GMO and natural products that transforms it into a
sympathy toward ecological security. Innumerable people likewise need to dodge the pesticides
that are pumped into the GMOs alongside their general craving to ensure their wellbeing. At last,
Surname 5
many are similarly battling back against the massive agrochemical partnerships that have
dynamically gotten reaction increasingly, for exclusively developing and offering the GMOs for
substantial benefit.
As per the neighborhood bunch, GMO Jackson -Free County, local people in Oregon
Southern began supporting for legal moderates for the boycott of genetically modified organisms
in 2012. During this time, Jackson County inhabitants discovered that neighborhood landowners
had been shrunk by a Swiss biotech organization that needed to utilize their vacant parcels to
develop hereditarily built sugar beets. The residents expected that the dust, helped through the
twist from the GMO products would debase their natural or non-GMO crops (Poulter 193). In the
wake of endeavoring to contact government offices, the nearby Nationals composed a request of
that would boycott GMO farming in Jackson County. According to Ermine, more than 6700
Various natural and non-GMO ranchers at Oregon's are worried for agribusiness of
GMOs sugar in the territory. A single blossom of sugar holds a huge number of dust granules
that numerous researchers discovered that via the wind, the grains might be diverted kilometers
in the first area it is developed (Evelyn). Whenever natural or non-GMO agriculturists have their
harvests tainted by the hereditarily designed dust, they can't offer their items. Honest Morton, a
native seed rancher who develops organisms for their seeds, partakes in Ann Airline's comments.
"Who's dependable if it isn't on a rope? I'm a confirmed natural seed producer, and if (his
harvests) were to get sullied with any distinguishable measure the item ends up plainly useless."
If neighborhood physical and non-GMO agriculturists can't offer their yields and seeds because
of cross-fertilization, it makes financial problems in the field of agriculture. The sugar beet
Surname 6
industry needs to secure the seeds that it depends on; notwithstanding, they are not hesitant to
venture on the nearby non-GMO ranchers keeping in mind the end goal to do as such.
Science as a whole is a brave new world'; the application of new concepts and methods
are occurring at a much more rapid pace than it is possible to thoroughly monitor and manage for
possible present and future detrimental outcomes (Decker, Kaskey 334). Indeed, we expect that
ethical parameters will be utilized in the pursuit of scientific endeavors aimed to improve the
human experience. Realistically, we must acknowledge that it is impossible to plan for all
contingencies; particularly when there are instances that are beyond our ability to fathom.
Therefore, the best approach is to brainstorm and weigh out (to the nth degree) the
potential hazards and benefits of a particular scenario before proceeding with its actualization.
Regarding GMO or, in this instance, genetically modified plants and organisms, the benefit is
increased foodstuffs to feed a burgeoning world population. The consequences of GMO can be
its impact on human physiology and the ecology of the planet in future generations. Increasingly,
people are educating themselves on the topic of GMO and its future effects; and arguing against
Conclusion
As this assignment calls for more than a mere reiteration of both sides of the issue; but a
personal assessment of the topic, I will proffer that the current suffering of individuals
(particularly children) calls for an immediate and decisive response. All indications are that
genetically modified organisms may hold the answer to world hunger, and under the current
circumstances, it is a clear response I wholly support. The conjecture of its negative impact in the
future aside; a life saved through GMO may one day be the life that provides new hope in the
face of tomorrow's devastating problems. Finally, and ever so quickly, another concern of
Surname 7
GMOs for which there is no current definitive response is its impact on the environment long
term. In all, it is evident that the jury is still out' on the ultimate value or use of GMOs. In this
case, GMOs foods should be banned since their negative sides outweigh positive sides as
Works Cited
Bock, Ralph. "The give-and-take of DNA: horizontal gene transfer in plants." Trends in plant
science 15.1 (2010): 11-22.
Decker, S.; Kaskey, J. "Monsanto Sued by Organic Farmers Over Modified-Seed Patents"
Bloomberg (2011).
Poulter, S American 'Frankenstein food' company pulls plug on plans to put GM organisms on
British dinner tables because there is no appetite for the produce . (2013). Daily Mail;
retrieved at < http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2335231/GM-giant-gives-
Frankenstein-Food-Europe.html>