The Conflict Over Genetically Modified Foods
When going to the grocery store, people are well aware of what they can and cannot eat due to allergies, calorie counts, and as far as nitrates are concerned. There is one thing consumers do not know about their food: whether or not it is genetically modified (Mientka 1). GMOs, or, genetically modified organisms, have created a great strife recently. Some argue that GMOs are safe, helpful, and cost efficient. The truth is though, GMOs are not. GMOs, as they are today, are unsafe and a threat to both consumers and nature. Not only are there many safety concerns for GMOs, but there are also issues such as the right for people to know what they are eating and the evolution of pests due to the growing …show more content…
GMO is the shortened term for ‘genetically modified organism’. This means that the plant’s genes were altered to fit a certain purpose better or function in a different way. Scientists change the plants by inserting genes with a desired trait such as bug resistance, weed-killer resistance, or faster growth into a plant 's genes (“GMO food bans” 1). The original purpose of GMOs was to produce and salvage more food and to ultimately solve the issue of hunger in the world. Genetic Modification is not the solution. Though it is a way to create more food, the food being made is not necessarily good food: It is bad for both the consumers and the environment. Shoppers buying food have the right to know what it is that they are eating, yet due to the lack of labeling: they do not know. Pests can evolve quicker and become stronger faster because of GMOs. Lastly, genetically modified foods are not good for people, animals, or the …show more content…
These risks are not only for those eating the GMO foods, but for nature and the environment as well. Those who are pro-GMO argue that currently there are no known long term effects of eating genetically modified foods. This is not true for several reasons. First off, long term effects may be yet to show in the near future. This is demonstrated as Jane E. Brody writes, “A legitimate safety concern involves possible delayed deleterious effects of genetically modified products on consumers, the environment or the ' 'balance ' ' of nature” (Brody 3). In other words, there could be delayed effects of GMO foods on those who eat them or on the food chain due to the increased growth of plants with foreign genes. Pamm Larry, a voice in the food-labeling initiative, made a point comparing genetically modified foods to cigarettes by saying “Health problems from eating genetically modified organisms could surface years from now… People used to think that smoking wasn 't addictive” (“California to Vote” 1). In addition, there has been proof that shows the negative effects of GMOs on their consumers. For instance, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini did an experiment in which he had two groups of rats. He fed one group GMO corn and the other group non-GMO corn. His studies show that the group of rats eating the GMO corn were more likely to die prematurely than the group fed non-GMO corn (Parrett 5). On top of all
When going to the grocery store, people are well aware of what they can and cannot eat due to allergies, calorie counts, and as far as nitrates are concerned. There is one thing consumers do not know about their food: whether or not it is genetically modified (Mientka 1). GMOs, or, genetically modified organisms, have created a great strife recently. Some argue that GMOs are safe, helpful, and cost efficient. The truth is though, GMOs are not. GMOs, as they are today, are unsafe and a threat to both consumers and nature. Not only are there many safety concerns for GMOs, but there are also issues such as the right for people to know what they are eating and the evolution of pests due to the growing …show more content…
GMO is the shortened term for ‘genetically modified organism’. This means that the plant’s genes were altered to fit a certain purpose better or function in a different way. Scientists change the plants by inserting genes with a desired trait such as bug resistance, weed-killer resistance, or faster growth into a plant 's genes (“GMO food bans” 1). The original purpose of GMOs was to produce and salvage more food and to ultimately solve the issue of hunger in the world. Genetic Modification is not the solution. Though it is a way to create more food, the food being made is not necessarily good food: It is bad for both the consumers and the environment. Shoppers buying food have the right to know what it is that they are eating, yet due to the lack of labeling: they do not know. Pests can evolve quicker and become stronger faster because of GMOs. Lastly, genetically modified foods are not good for people, animals, or the …show more content…
These risks are not only for those eating the GMO foods, but for nature and the environment as well. Those who are pro-GMO argue that currently there are no known long term effects of eating genetically modified foods. This is not true for several reasons. First off, long term effects may be yet to show in the near future. This is demonstrated as Jane E. Brody writes, “A legitimate safety concern involves possible delayed deleterious effects of genetically modified products on consumers, the environment or the ' 'balance ' ' of nature” (Brody 3). In other words, there could be delayed effects of GMO foods on those who eat them or on the food chain due to the increased growth of plants with foreign genes. Pamm Larry, a voice in the food-labeling initiative, made a point comparing genetically modified foods to cigarettes by saying “Health problems from eating genetically modified organisms could surface years from now… People used to think that smoking wasn 't addictive” (“California to Vote” 1). In addition, there has been proof that shows the negative effects of GMOs on their consumers. For instance, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini did an experiment in which he had two groups of rats. He fed one group GMO corn and the other group non-GMO corn. His studies show that the group of rats eating the GMO corn were more likely to die prematurely than the group fed non-GMO corn (Parrett 5). On top of all