Gm Food Watching What We Eat Analysis

In 2015, Tim Anderson, a PhD researcher, wrote “GMO Foods are Unsafe”, an article which perhaps sheds light on the mishandling of genetically modified foods, including the lack of testing of said food products, as well as the potential hazards posed to humans and the environment. In the same year, Genetic Literacy Project’s web editor, JoAnna Wendel, wrote a contrasting article “Genetically Modified Foods Have Been Studied and Found Safe to Eat”, and voices her disgust over the false information that constantly belittle GMOs. She believes the allegation that little evaluation has been accomplished to monitor and ensure the safety of these genetic modifications is based on frantic opinions and not accurate facts. Although their positions appear to utterly oppose one

“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.

The article taught me that not all genetically modified plants help the environment. The GT corn is a great example why we should learn more about

This article brings about a vital question to the forefront, are GMOs really safe? The article goes on to dissect all the myths about genetic modification and points out the fact that there has been no strict regulation on the production

The world of GMO’s is a very back and forth world, one side insists it is good, one side insists it is horrible. A woman named Robyn O'Brien, who is part of an organization who is against GMO’s (genetically modified organism), gave a Tedtalk, an informative lecture, about GMO’s, whether they are good for you or not. Each side has come up with their own way of explaining their side of the story, and everyone has had some influences to sway what they are saying. Robyn for example, used a Pathos (emotional) argument, and was influenced by what she does for work, and her family.

I support the case for genetically modified crops and organisms. Genetically modified crops are the fruit of countless hours of research by researchers who work tirelessly in the pursuit of a world in which food is more sustainable for human beings. The reason why I support the development of GMOS is due to the fact that in light of our continually growing human species, genetically modified crops are necessary to

GMOs can help feed the future. The reasoning for this is because GMOs are capable of surviving the harsh conditions of the environment, so farmers have the capability to preserve water and energy in order to feed the future. Furthermore the article “GMOs and the Environment” mentions that “the total land devoted to agriculture around the globe is 20,000,000 square miles. That’s more than five times the area of the united states. The availability of farmland is essential to agricultural production. And yet, the availability of new land suitable for crop production is limited”(3). This key information shows the true importance of agriculture land and how this land will play a vital role ,but it is limited for the sheer fact that farmland is

I am writing you to share my opinion about Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) and Genetically Modified Foods (GMF). As a student at Sylvania Southview High school, we have spent the past week learning about GMOs. Personally, I believe GMO present an opportunity to feed our ever growing population, not just in Ohio, but all over the world. According to Gwynne Taylor of Resilience.org, “For the sixth time in the past seven years, the human race will grow less food than it eats this year. We closed the gap by eating into food stocks accumulated in better times, but there is no doubt that the situation is getting serious.” Before long, we do not change what we are doing, we will completely deplete our food storages. GMOs present the opportunity to grow new plants that can be more resistant to herbicide, grow with less and and nutrients, and even grow all over the world.

It’s clear that Genetically modified foods have negative impact on the consumers. Furthermore, the production of the GMOs results to increased use of herbicides and other chemicals. This chemical have a negative effect on the environment. Furthermore, the genetically modified foods have possibilities of producing unpredictable side effects. All this effects have costs that results to the process of combating them. Therefore, the negative impacts and associated costs of the negative impacts outweighs the cost of producing the food in the

There is much controversy surrounding not only the safety of GMOs but also that they are ruining our natural environment. Chassy states that critics and the public cite concerns with the “effect on human health and environment, biosafety, world trade monopolies, trustworthiness of public institutions, integrity of regulatory agencies, loss of individual

Critics of GMO: Arguing that the use of GMO is not justified as it is unnatural, unsafe, and may have long term environmental impacts.

Challengers believe that there are serious consequences regarding genetically modified foods. A study conducted by the International Journal of Biological Sciences liked GMO corn consumption and organ failure in laboratory rats (Goldstein & Emami, 2011). Also, contamination of traditional, non GMO crops through cross pollination. After contamination takes place it’s not visually possible to distinguish the GMO crop from a traditional crop. This can cause legal issues for farmers as the GMO seeds are patented and require permission for their use. The farmer can unknowingly grow GMO contaminated seeds then infringing on the seed company’s

Over the past decade, genetically modified organisms (GMO’s) have been incorporated into the food we consume on a daily basis. This has been affecting the health and wellness of numerous people. GMO’ are special organisms in which the genetic material has been modified or changed for product quality and improvement. There have been many arguments as to whether or not GMO’s are harmful or if they come along with benefits. The first article "IN-THE KNOW ON GMOs," addresses several ways how to avoid consuming GMO’s and a step-by-step guide to becoming healthier, which was written by Melissa Diane Smith. The second article "Should You Worry About GMO’s," is an article about how GMO’s are constantly being consumed without us even knowing, and the hazards they cause. This article was published by Tufts University. Even though Smiths’ article appears to have less information and less complicated than the other, Smiths’ article is more credible than Phillips’.

What alarms the activist and pessimist is the safety of the genetically modified crops. But “more than 1,700 peer-reviewed safety studies have been published, including five lengthy reports from the National Research Council, that focus on human health and the environment. The scientific consensus is that existing GMOs are no more or less risky than conventional crops” (Popular Science). The GMO crops are produced through altering genes that have been modified from genes derived from traditionally grown crops. Through the studies, they have proven that the biotechnology of GMOs is as safe as traditionally grown crops. In “The most comprehensive study of

Moving on to posterior reasoning, the article features experts that have done some kind of work regarding GM-crops. For example, Sir Mark Wolpert, the government chief scientist and his opinion on the CST’s report “The challenge is to get more from existing land in a sustainable way or face the alternative, which is that people will go unfed, or we'll have to bring more wilderness land into cultivation." The article also includes a quantitative type of reasoning, “By 2050, it is likely Earth's population will have reached 9 billion.” The moral/ethical/aesthetic reasoning in this article is the focus on the aspect of how GM-crops can help countries such as Great Britain in terms of food scarcity. As well, the author has a strong, positive attitude towards using technology and science to help with this situation and they believe that nothing else can help with the food scarcity other than GM-crops. The quality of the evidence is trusted because the experts who are mentioned are relevant to the argument and also, they have a high status in their respected fields of work. The Guardian is well trusted because it has been publishing articles for not only academic purposes but also entertainment purposes. The evidence shown in this article is convincing because it includes both perspectives of the argument, it states “Not everyone will agree, of course.” And then proceeds onto show the negative effects of GM-crops. Aside