The concept of Genetically Modified Foods (GMOs) has raised a controversial debate amongst different people with different perspectives. The proponents of the GMOs argue that provision of genetically modified foods is the only means of feeding a fast increasing population in the world where resources are continuously decreasing (Freedman 1). On the contrary, the opponents claim that the introduction of GMOs is a direct and obvious way of interfering with nature, and the results could be awful. The world remains in confusion with many unanswered questions. Genetically Modified Organisms should not be adapted for use in the society until adequate research has been fully accomplished by the effects GMOs could have on a future generation.
According to Goldberg, a plant molecular biologist at the University of California, GMOs are safe to human health and what people are experiencing is a fake fear over the genetically modified crops. He further claims that the objections against the GMOs are a concept that should not bother the modern society as this was the debate that happened forty years ago (Freedman 2). Moreover, he says that scientists have already provided clear evidence on the safety of GMOs towards human health and dangerous diseases such as cancer are associated with GMO crops.
David Williams, a cellular biologist, has a different perspective to that of Goldberg. He presents his case with the evidence that when any gene is placed in a different genome, the genome reacts with it. On reaction, the genes can be transformed into various forms, and the impacts might not occur immediately. The danger of the gene being transformed into various forms by the genome is that its effects can occur several generations later since the gene was changed (Freedman, The Truth about Genetically Modified Food, Scientific American). The suspected adverse effects raises a lot of fear because in instances where the scientists have not realized individual impacts of GMOs then it means that there is a probability that such crops can affect the entire generation in the future. Williams further makes it clear that organizations that sell GMOs are sponsoring many scientific researchers so that their results can be in favor of the GMOs. More so, the scientist who points out the health or any other risks that are associated with GMOs find themselves in great trouble because of vicious attacks and critics on the credibility of their findings (Sarich, Impartial Scientific Journals Rejecting GMO Ads Revealing True Information). They are therefore likely to remain silent despite the fact that they could have noted a problem that is associated with the GMOs.
A retrospective look at the issue of GMOs among the scientist gives much weight to the critics of the GMOs. There is a lot more that need to be discovered about GMOs before fully approval and acceptance. Embracing GMOs poses the health risks that are yet to be discovered. Also, with the adoption of the use of glyphosate and roundup, countries using them such as Sri-Lanka are already experiencing serious health problems (Walia 1). Most of the people working in rice areas in Sri-Lanka have been found to suffer from kidney problems a health risk that can be related to the use of glyphosate. Also, De Vendomois, Joel Spiroux et al. (8) argues that pesticides residues are present in more than 80% of the GMO crops that are being cultivated to date.
A study conducted and published in the Journal of Reproductive and Toxicology in 2011 in Canada revealed that there were some pesticides that are associated with GMOs. The pesticides were found in the blood of maternal, fetal and non-pregnant womens (Aris and Leblanc 3). The impacts could be higher in North and South America because GMOs contributes to about 80% of the constituents that are used to make packaged food (Gasparro, The GMO Fight Ripples Down the Food Chain, The Wall Street Journal). Most probably the GMO pesticides ended up in their bodies after they consumed GMO corns or livestock that had fed on the GMO grains. The fact that these pesticides have been traced in humans blood does not directly translate to having affected their health in any way. However, it instills fear that the effects might not be immediate but rather they could occur many years later. There is also fear that if GMOs are accepted wholly in the society the continued research on GMOs that is being conducted may come to a halt.
In case the effects appear many years later, the society might find itself is a chaotic mess with no idea where to start curbing the effects. The impacts could be severe to an extent of sweeping the entire human race on earth. We can therefore not take such risk by allowing the consumption of GMOs in our society. GMO technology has been recently introduced, and its products have not received sufficient research. Rather than taking risks, it would be much better to have alternatives of feeding increasingly growing the population. For instance, the government can advocate foods that grow in semi-arid areas. It can also help people to grow them to feed the rapidly growing population. This way, there will be no excuse for using GMOs that might pose health risks for the generation to come. A lot of researches also need to be done before GMOs can be embraced.
Aris A, Leblanc S. "Maternal and fetal exposure to pesticides associated to genetically modified." Reproductive Toxicology (2011). July 1, 2015. <https://www.uclm.es/Actividades/repositorio/pdf/doc_3721_4666.pdf>.
De Vendomois, Joel Spiroux et al. Debate on GMOs Health Risks after Statistical Findings in Regulatory Tests. International Journal of Biological Sciences 6.6 (2010): 590598. Print. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2952409/pdf/ijbsv06p0590.pdf
Freedman, David H. "The Truth about Genetically Modified Food." Scientific American (2013).
BIBLIOGRAPHY \l 1033 Gasparro, Annie. "The GMO Fight Ripples Down the Food Chain ." THE WALL STREET JOURNAL (2014). 1 July 2015. <http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-gmo-fight-ripples-down-the-food-chain-1407465378>.
BIBLIOGRAPHY \l 1033 Sarich, Christina. "Impartial Scientific Journals Rejecting GMO Ads Revealing True Information." Natural Society: Transform Your Health Naturally (2014). 1 July 2015. <http://naturalsociety.com/impartial-scientific-journals-reject-dr-bronners-ad/>.
Walia, Arjun. "Ten Scientific Studies Prove that Genetically Modified Food Can Be Harmful To Human Health." Global Research Newsletter (2014). http://www.globalresearch.ca/ten-scientific-studies-proving-gmos-can-be-harmful-to-human-health/5377054
Cite this page
Genetically Modified Organisms. (2019, May 23). Retrieved from https://speedypaper.com/essays/genetically-modified-organisms
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SpeedyPaper website, please click below to request its removal:
- Benefits of Playing Sports
- Case study report
- The needs of users using on-line locator services
- The Relationship Between Infection Levels and Polymorphisms
- CONGESTIVE HEART FAILURE
- The Prudhoe Bay Oil Spill
- The evolution of digital art
- Intellectual property Apple's Patents War versus Samsung
- On A Cluster Differentiation Antigen Expressed on the Immune B cell
- Pricing Strategy
- VIDEO QUALITY OF SERVICE
- Personal Statement for Pharmacy School
- Theoretical perspectives used to interpret social life
- Women in the Revolutionary War
- Islamic Perspective on Euthanasia