The Controversy Over GMO Restrictions

GMOs are living organisms whose genetic material has been artificially manipulated in a laboratory through genetic engineering. The GMO debate has a huge gap just like the climate change’s ambiguous debate. Some people are for the consumption of it and have as arguments that GMOs will feed the future population of the world that is expected to double in the few years to come, or that scientists can build stronger crops that resist to pests, therefore less use of pesticides. Some are against these ideas because they think that GMOs represent a threat to the environment and that they can cause a lot of health problems. The goal of this paper is to look at two articles “The GMO Debate is Over Again” by Mark Lynas and" Seeds of Evil: Monsanto and Genetic Engineering" by Dr. Joseph Mercola, and see where the use rhetorical strategies are effective and where they are not.

The controversy surrounding GMO. 's and the food industry has been a very hard fought battle for the past couple of decades and it has even become more so in recent times, particularly on the opposing side. Many groups against genetically modified organisms in food have been on the rise. As the trend towards "non-gmo" foods is becoming more popular, companies ranging from cereal producers to fast food restaurants are quickly updating their products to "Non-GMO" standards in order to meet the growing demand. But a disease affecting Florida oranges may begin to shift the view towards a possible "Pro-GMO" future.

In this unit, the two periods of biology studied and learned more about GMO’s. We looked into things such as breeding and eugenics and how exactly it relates to the overall action of genetically modifying organisms. A genetically modified organism is the result of a gene from one organism, purposefully being changed to improve another organism. According to americanradioworks, organisms were being manipulated dating all the way back to prehistoric times to the 1900s. Farmers and naturalists began to notice “hybrid” plants, being produced through natural breeding. In 1900, European plant scientist began using Gregor Mendel's genetic theory to manipulate plants to produce a more desirable outcome. This means that Organisms have been getting genetically modified for years. Although the event of this action dates back for years, controversies are still shared in classrooms and homes, about whether GMOs are a necessary part of today’s life.

In December 2014, a Harvard professor wrote an article outlining the many benefits of GMOs (genetically modified organisms) and why it is a good idea to use them. This professor is now surrounded by controversy because he failed to note his connection to the largest producer of GM seeds, Monsanto, who not only told him to write the article but also gave him the major points he was to address. Why was this such a huge deal, and why did Monsanto want a pro-GMO article out there so badly? The GMO debate is largely controversial, but largely misunderstood because of the misinformation given by biased writers, such as John Hibma, a nutritionist and author who wrote the article “More Pros Than Cons.” What many people do not realize is that genetic modification is a serious issue and that articles like Hibma’s fail to disclose the truth about the numerous health, crop, and environmental concerns surrounding GMOs.

GMO stands for genetically modified organism. It is a organism that has had changes introduced into its DNA by using techniques of genetic engineering. Genetically modified (GM) foods are foods that are produced by this method. Genetically modified crops were first introduced to the marketplace in the 1990s. Various different companies started emerging and began to grow many different modified crops including tomatoes and corn. Livestock is fed GM feed, and recently a genetically modified salmon was approved for human consumption. Our society and other nations should limit the consumption of GM foods until their safety can be proven and their disadvantages are corrected.

Another contributing factor to the controversial nature of GMOs is the fact that a majority of the world does not consider such food products safe, since “ in more than 60 countries around the world, including Australia, Japan, and all of the countries in the European Union, there are significant restrictions or outright bans on the production and sale of GMOs” (The Non-GMO). However, even though genetically engineered organisms are widely considered to be unsafe in many aspects, the U.S. government has little to no restrictions on the production and consumption of these products.

GMOs have been deemed completely safe and legal. Other countries however, have firmly set their feet on the other side of the fence. Although it doesn’t directly affect us Americans right now, it could in 50 years when there are nine billion people. The simple fact is, if they aren’t using GMOs than they are not getting the greatest yield possible out of their crops, and if they remain anti-GMO they won’t be pulling what little weight their smaller countries can pull when crunch time comes and our world needs more food

A genetically modified organism, GMO, has been altered by genetic engineering techniques. GMOs are widely used by scientists in many different ways to include the production of food and in research.8 Zebrafish genetically modified to be a fluorescent bright red, green and orange have been available for purchase as pets in 49 states in the United States since 2003.8 However, these patented GloFish are banned in California. The California Fish and Game Commission decided the fish were the result of a “trivial use for a powerful technology.”7 The Commission’s belief that the fish should not have been created led to a law making the GloFish illegal. Originally GloFish were developed by scientists in Singapore to be living pollution sensors as they would only glow when in the presence of pollutants.7 The Commission’s ban on GloFish highlights the controversy over genetically modified organisms and how public opinion can be swayed by the beliefs of others whether those beliefs are based on science or not. This paper will focus first on what genetic modification means and then will look at the pros and cons of genetically modified foods. Finally, the author’s opinion of the issue of GMO food will conclude the paper.

Controversy started in 1994, when the commercial sale of GMOs began. Dictionary.com states, “A GMO is an organism whose genome has been altered by the techniques of genetic engineering so that its DNA contains one or more genes not normally found their” (Definition+of+gmo). As it may sound unethical to inject other genes into a perfectly normal plant, “As much as “70 percent” of food prepackaged in a normal grocery store contain genetically modified foods” (Negative Impacts on GM foods) stated Genetically Modified Foods.

After reading this week’s reading essay Virtue Theory and Genetically Modified Crops by Joshua Colt Gambrel my option on GM Crops have changed completely. When I first heard about GM Crops I thought that no good could from it, and we should not start using them in order to produce food. After reading Joshua Colt article I can see the good that can from using GM Corps. Using GM Crops allowed for the creation of golden rice that has health benefits that can help better the lives of people. At the beginning of the essay the author Joshua Colt on page 622 in our text book says this which I believe to be the main put of the article “ In this article, I hope to provide an answer to the question, are we morally justified in utilizing GM crops?” Which I believe this question asked by Joshua Colt is the main point to his article Virtue Theory and Genetically Modified Crops. In answering this question Joshua Colt talks about all the negative things that could happen if we start to use these GM Crops but he also talks about the possible positive out comes that can come from using them if we do it in the right way. The question that comes to mind after reading Virtue Theory and Genetically Modified Crops the question that comes to mind is what would be the proper way to use these crops in a

the rise in advanced technology, Genetically Modified Foods were engineered and created. Not only were they new in the sense that it provided an easier source of growing, but it also brought ,with it, a new controversy across the world. Genetically Modified Foods (GMOs) are created by moving a gene from one animal to another. An example of this would be moving the gene of an Icefish to a tomato to give the tomato a longer shelf life. GMOs were intended to help increase food production and help foods last longer however, GMOs have become very controversial because of their potential health and environmental effects. GMOs could have detrimental effects on the population and on the Earth.

Around seventy percent of the United State’s processed foods contain genetically modified ingredients. A GMO is an organism, whose DNA has been altered by adding another organism’s DNA to create a certain trait, such as corn that kills bugs. With genetically modified foods, feeding the hungry will be easier, along with farmers being able to produce more crops. The US should allow the production and selling of more genetically modified organisms.

Meanwhile, a growing body of evidence connects GMOs with health problems, environmental damage and violation of farmers’ and consumers’ rights.

for GMO labelling and possibly a ban on certain GMO crops, because our lives, our species, and our generation, are not the only things being affected by this infestation of ignorance. Life is sacred. As individuals, we will go through great lengths to preserve life in any way possible. Healthcare workers probably know this best because they have dedicated their own lives to saving others. We wouldn’t be able to save as many lives if science wasn’t equally sacred. Scientific studies need to be conducted with the highest levels of integrity to ensure that we are progressing into the future and making improvements for humanity. Without independent testing and publications in peer-reviewed journals, there is no way to confirm if a

The authors of this article are credible due to their experience in the field of GMO research. Erik Millstone is a professor in Science and Technology Policy at the University of Sussex. Professor Millstone is also the Director of Studies for the SPRU MSc in Science and Technology Policy. Professor Millstone also happens to be UK’s leading independent scholars in food safety policy. Andy Stirling is also a Professor in Science and Technology at the University of Sussex. He was Director of Studies for SPRU MSc until turning it over to Professor Millstone. Professor Stirling has also served on many different boards such as the UN IHDP Integrated Risk Governance. Dominic Glover is an expertise in Agriculture, Biotechnology, and environmental