About 68% of people in America listen to the first statistic they hear, and believe whatever the so-called "fact" is, as long as it is coming from a semi official source. The main focus point of the entire narrative is that a very popular weapon used by people who are skeptical of new advancements in agricultural biotechnology claim that there has been little to no evaluation of the safety concerning GM crops, and that there is no scientific consensus on this issue. Those claims as well as the numerous other claims listed in the article are simply not true. There is a lot of reasoning behind the public's distrust of GMO's, but it mostly lies within the psychology, the politics, and the false debates. Psychology is the study of mind and behavior.
…show more content…
Psychologists attempt to understand the role of mental functions in individual and social behavior, while also exploring the physiological and biological processes that underlie cognitive functions and behaviors. People may think, "What does psychology have anything to do with why people do not trust GMO's?" However, the reality is psychology is a very powerful thing. "The Placebo Effect" also known as the placebo response, a remarkable phenomenon in which a placebo, (a fake treatment, an inactive substance like sugar, distilled water, saline solution, ect.) can sometimes improve a patient's condition simply because the person has the expectation that it will be helpful to them. I think the Placebo Effect is a wonderful example as to why people are hesitant to GM crops. One scenario that could be occurring …show more content…
The food politics want to make sure GMO's and the genetically modified modern agriculture are safe to eat and not a threat to keeping individuals healthy. To try to ensure that even though there are extensive benefits in making the crops more resistant, to potential pesticides, drought, cold and sickness as well as boosting food production. The supporter to the pro arguments just sees this as a most precise method. In short, genetically modified foods are among the most extensively studied scientific subjects in history and there is no credible evidence that GMO"S poses any unique threat to the environment or the public health. The Anti GMO see Genetic engineering as a different method form traditional method of plant and animal breeding because it crosses barriers transferring genes of one being to another or a species to another. A good example, the article mentions governments in Europe and Italy in particular have not been as embracing of genetically modified crops. People can find the same consensus of thinking in South America as well. Many of the studies reveal the differences of thinking between the US and the EU and other counties when it comes to any king or regulating practices. China, Australia, and the European Union require GMO foods to be labeled. The U.S. does not. One of the largest growing researches is concern that GMO's could contaminate the environment, depending on
Psychologists attempt to understand the role of mental functions in individual and social behavior, while also exploring the physiological and biological processes that underlie cognitive functions and behaviors. People may think, "What does psychology have anything to do with why people do not trust GMO's?" However, the reality is psychology is a very powerful thing. "The Placebo Effect" also known as the placebo response, a remarkable phenomenon in which a placebo, (a fake treatment, an inactive substance like sugar, distilled water, saline solution, ect.) can sometimes improve a patient's condition simply because the person has the expectation that it will be helpful to them. I think the Placebo Effect is a wonderful example as to why people are hesitant to GM crops. One scenario that could be occurring …show more content…
The food politics want to make sure GMO's and the genetically modified modern agriculture are safe to eat and not a threat to keeping individuals healthy. To try to ensure that even though there are extensive benefits in making the crops more resistant, to potential pesticides, drought, cold and sickness as well as boosting food production. The supporter to the pro arguments just sees this as a most precise method. In short, genetically modified foods are among the most extensively studied scientific subjects in history and there is no credible evidence that GMO"S poses any unique threat to the environment or the public health. The Anti GMO see Genetic engineering as a different method form traditional method of plant and animal breeding because it crosses barriers transferring genes of one being to another or a species to another. A good example, the article mentions governments in Europe and Italy in particular have not been as embracing of genetically modified crops. People can find the same consensus of thinking in South America as well. Many of the studies reveal the differences of thinking between the US and the EU and other counties when it comes to any king or regulating practices. China, Australia, and the European Union require GMO foods to be labeled. The U.S. does not. One of the largest growing researches is concern that GMO's could contaminate the environment, depending on