More handpicked essays just for you.
Impact of agriculture on the environment
Gm crops, the answer to world hunger
Impact of agriculture on the environment
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Impact of agriculture on the environment
With his op-ed piece “ Can GMOs Help End World Hunger,” Executive Director Dr. John Robbins of the Massachusetts chapter of Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the largest Muslim advocacy and civil rights organization in the United States, begins asking the question of how genetically engineered foods can help feed the hungry. Robbins presents similar points to the reader that involve the issue of anti-GMO activists and overzealous environmentalists standing in the way of a world hunger cure. However these key points are just a smokescreen to the real matter at hand when concerning world hunger. Robbins explains and develops his argumentative theory of world hunger through the dramatically illustrated time magazine cover story, “Grains …show more content…
Using the strategies of logos Robbin displays how even if certain companies given enough time and money could supply genetically modified crops that contain higher levels of nutrients or vitamins, he is still not sure on whether it would actually benefit the world’s poor. Also included in his argument statistical evidence shows how it would take a young eleven year old boy consuming twenty seven bowls of the golden genetically modified rice to satisfy his minimum requirement for Vitamin A deficiency. Robbins also goes on to say how Monsanto and many of these other biotech companies are not simply going to give away their produce. He explains how the people in need of these genetic foods will not be able to afford their price as they are not even able to afford the price of simple regular produce. Robbins applies both a logical and pathos side toward his argument by stating that “If people such as farmers can’t afford to buy genetically modified seeds, or if they can’t afford the fertilizers, pesticides and water the seeds require, they’ll be left
Food is an essential part of everyday life without it one could not survive. Every day we make choices on what we put in to our bodies. There are countless varieties of food to choose from to meet the diverse tastes of the increasing population. Almost all food requires a label explaining the ingredients and the nutritional value allowing consumers to make informed decisions on what they are consuming. However, many may not be considering where that food is coming from or how it has been produced. Unfortunately, there is more to food than meets the eye. Since 1992, “ the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ruled, based on woefully limited data, that genetically modified foods were ‘substantially equivalent’ to their non-GM counterparts” (Why to Support Labeling). GM food advocates have promised to create more nutritious food that will be able to grow in harsh climate conditions and eventually put an end to world hunger in anticipation of the growing population. There is very little evidence to support these claims and study after study has proven just the opposite. GM crops are not only unsafe to consume, but their growing practices are harmful to the environment, and multinational corporations are putting farmers out of business.
Thesis Statement: Research suggests that GMO's (genetically modified organisms/products) could be harmful for people and the environment because of their potential to produce new allergens, increase toxicity, decrease nutritional value, and increase bacterial antibiotic resistance. Bakshi, A. K. (2003). Potential adverse health effects of genetically modified crops. Journal Of Toxicology And Environmental Health,Part B, 6, 211-225. Retrieved from http://globalseminarhealth.wdfiles.com/local--files/nutrition/Bakshi.pdf This article is one of the pioneering research papers that addresses the potential negative impact of genetically modified crops.
Monsanto is a multinational agricultural and agrochemical biotechnology corporation based in America and is the largest producer of genetically engineered seeds. Monsanto argues that using science and newfound research to create genetically modified food is necessary in order to save our world from starvation. Eduardo Blumwald, a professor of cell biology and employee for Monsanto, says that genetically modified food could be “the only viable solution we have for our future” (Ostrander 24) where it is predicted that the temperature and population will soar. Blumwald argues that without genetically engineering food to produce under high temperatures with little water, the world could potentially starve in this predicted future. Yet regardless of “biotech industry promises, none of the GMO traits currently on the market offer increased yield, drought tolerance, enhanced nutrition, or any other consumer benefit” (“GMO Facts”). Instead, Monsanto genetically modifies food to resist RoundUp, a pesticide the company has created to kill any plants or bugs other than the genetically engineered crop. According to the World Health Organization, this pesticide “is a probable human carcinogen” (“GMOs”) due to glyphosate, a
Naively, we human beings believe we live in the dazzling golden age of technological advancements. Only, news flash: we’re not. Global food insecurity is at an all-time high. We’re struggling to feed a population that rises as quickly as the mercury in my thermometer. As demand soars and food dwindles, the men in power only seem to grow in size: from their wallets to their waistlines. So, you must ask yourself: what’s the easiest way to produce high quality crops to satisfy our hunger and their lust for money and power? The answer: Genetic Modification. As the documentary Food Inc. suggests, the concept may be brilliant, but the outcome is abhorrent.
How many of you hear the words “genetically modified food” and immediately think “BAD”? How many of you scorn the idea that genetically modified foods are useful? How many of you have been manipulated by the media to think that all biotechnology is evil? Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are organisms that have been genetically spliced to achieve a certain trait. As the demand for a larger food supply is increasing due to population growth, the benefits that GMO foods provide are being hailed as the only solution to the food crisis. However, many people are making inadequately informed decisions, and are pushing them to the back shelf. I will inform you on why genetically modified organisms may be the only way to a stable, safe future for the less fortunate.
Genetically modified food’s, or GMOs, goal is to feed the world's malnourished and undernourished population. Exploring the positive side to GMOs paints a wondrous picture for our planet’s future, although careful steps must be taken to ensure that destruction of our ecosystems do not occur. When GMOs were first introduced into the consumer market they claimed that they would help eliminate the world’s food crisis by providing plants that produced more and were resistant to elemental impacts like droughts and bacterial contaminants, however, production isn’t the only cause for the world’s food crisis. Which is a cause for concern because the population on the earth is growing and our land and ways of agriculture will not be enough to feed everyone sufficiently. No simple solutions can be found or applied when there are so many lives involved. Those who are hungry and those who are over fed, alike, have to consider the consequences of Genetically Modified Organisms. Food should not be treated like a commodity it is a human necessity on the most basic of levels. When egos, hidden agendas, and personal gains are folded into people's food sources no one wins. As in many things of life, there is no true right way or wrong way to handle either of the arguments and so many factors are involved that a ‘simple’ solution is simply not an option.
Genetically engineered (GE) food crops have caused heated debate in the food industry for many decades and have caused many consumers major concern. According to Dr. Carroll Rawn, a biology professor at Seton Hall University, genetically engineering food entails taking genes from a certain crop and inserting those genes in the DNA of another. This process changes the nucleotide sequence of the crop and, therefore, its characteristics. The debate lies in the question of whether these changes are beneficial for the productivity and quality of the harvest. Jeremy Rifkin argues in his article, “Science and Technology: O Brave New World,” that GE foods are not beneficial for the environment by stating, “Virtually every genetically engineered organism released into the environment poses a potential threat to the ecosystem” (247). On the other hand, the internet article, “New Research Confirms Environmental Safety of GE Crops,” argues, “A comprehensive review of international research conducted on areas of potential concerns related to genetically engineered (GE) crops concludes that such crops do not provide unique ecological risks and may contribute to ecological benefits such as increased biodiversity.” Increased biodiversity means an increased number and variety of crops farmers are able to produce, which has many benefits, specifically feeding starving people around the world. Thus, it is clear that, while genetically engineered food crops do introduce some dangers to consumers and the environment, their benefits, specifically pest, herbicide, and disease resistant capabilities and the new opportunities they provide through biodiversity, clearly outweigh the...
The growing controversy over genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have left many Americans and people all around the world with various questions and concerns as to what they are really putting into their bodies. The issue at hand is one that, although is very dominant in the world today, many are still uneducated on the problem and have not been informed with the facts. GMOs have been placed in the world without much question or second thought and it is time that America hear what should have been told many years ago. Although over ninety percent of the food eaten everyday has been genetically modified in the United States, many today believe the food they eat everyday is perfectly healthy, safe, and beneficiary for them. On the contrary, however, others will argue that the food has become poisoned, unsanitary, and detrimental to the health of themselves and others due to the ongoing issue of genetically engineered foods. As food production grows, and more suspicions rise to the surface, many people are left with the begging question, “Are GMOs really bad for us?” Everyone one is entitled to his or her own opinion and there are many out there who would like to believe one side or another. Regardless of who believes what, after the research is conducted, in hopes of accumulating a better understanding of the issue, it will be known what genetically modified organisms really are, where genetically mutated crops originate from and whether genetically modifying crops are harming or benefiting the world.
Considering an argument as valid requires critical analysis of several aspects and providing strong evidence. Robin Mather, a journalist who “has passion for food and its sources, has worked at major metropolitan newspapers (the Detroit News, the Chicago Tribune)”(86), argues that GMOs have risks and hazards to human health and threats to wildlife and environment in her article “The Threats from Genetically Modified Foods”, whereas Entine, a colleague at the Genetic Literacy Project, and Wendel, a science writer(82), claim that GMOs are safe to eat and no harm to people or animals in their article “2000+Reasons Why GMOs are Safe to Eat and Environmentally Sustainable” Both articles’ authors state their ideas clearly for whether GMOs could be eaten or not. However, Mather provides more solid
As the number of people who are starving increases each day, many leaders and organizations throughout the world are looking for a solution to this global crisis. According to John Robbins, the founder of Earth Save and co-founder/president of the Food Revolution Network, “Nearly a million children die every year because they are weakened by vitamin A deficiency and an additional 350,000 go blind. Golden rice … will be a godsend for the half of humanity…” (Robbins). Genetic engineering could be the fix for this issue. Genetic engineering would allow for rice to be produced in mass quantities for a less expensive price than regular rice. Moreover, if genetic engineering of beef cows were to be pursued, it would allow for more beef to be produced per cow; this would allow people who are hunger stricken to get a well-rounded diet. Although critics of genetically modified crops argue that this might not be the healthiest solution to ending world hunger, these crops have been approved as safe by the Food and Drug Administration. Also, these crops would be a great supplement for people who need food immediately and do not have the resources to go and find a healthier source of
The term GM foods or GMO (genetically-modified organisms) is most commonly used to refer to crop plants created for human or animal consumption using the latest molecular biology techniques (Whitman, 2000). These plants have been modified in the laboratory to offer desired traits such as increased resistance to herbicides or improved nutritional content. Also, genetic engineering techniques have been applied to create plants with the exact desired trait very rapidly and accurately. For example, this is done by the geneticist isolating the gene responsible for drought tolerance and inserts it into another plant. The new genetically-modified plant will now have gained drought tolerance as well.
GMOs have their pros and cons, but in terms of their effects on biodiversity, the technology is almost solely negative in how it affects the environment. Genetically modified food can damage agriculture as it allows for less restraint on chemical usage which leads to stronger weeds and weaker soil. The crops can easily spread their genetically modified genome through the wind. GMOs damage living organisms by making nasty insects stronger and vital insects weaker. GM foods are correlated with the decline in mammal and bird health and the introduction of GM animals like salmon poses a threat to the ecosystem of wild fish. GMOs can also bear consequences in terms of genetic pollution and alteration through contamination and mutation to adaptation to evolution to species extinction. Indeed, some claims are not well supported and may require testing, like genetic alteration through consumption or the validity of correlating animal health deficits with GM feeds. However, overall, GM foods clearly affect the world negatively in terms of biodiversity and ecosystem impacts.
We live in a world that is constantly changing and advancing thanks to technological advancements, especially in the field of molecular genetics. Today, we are discovering and implementing new ways to overcome the ill-fated symptoms developed as a result from poor health or accidents. We are also making advancements in the field of agriculture thanks to molecular genetics. As we all know, food is an essential entity in our lives and is abundant as well as relatively easy to obtain here in the United States. However, as good as it may sound, this is not necessarily true for developing countries. Many people in developing countries receive very little food, if any, due to its scarcity. It is estimated that in Asia alone, close to 800 million people go to bed hungry every night due to food shortage. This problem can be alleviated by turning to the production of genetically modified organisms (a.k.a. GMOs).
Advocates claim that the world may benefit greatly from the production and consumption of GM foods, especially those countries with high rates of poverty and starvation. Experts insist that the GM products will put an end to world hunger. It is estimated that the world population will grow up to 9 billion people in 2050, and a good alternative to feed them is the GM products. Nowadays, in almost all African countries people are dying because of hunger and hunger-related diseases. The estimate of life expectation in these countries is fifty seven years old, and it will decrease to forty seven in 2020 (kwengwere 2-3). The governments of these countries are battling to put a stop to this unfair situation. Experts have said that the best alternative is the implementation of GM cultures in Africa; it will reduce the deaths, increase the life expectations and nourish the whole continent (Forsberg 1). The future of Africa is uncertain, but it is sure to depend on the hands of GM p...
Genetically modified (GM) foods have become omnipresent over the past decade. They are a technological breakthrough that allows humans to manipulate and add foreign genes to crops to enhance desired traits, but they have also evolved into a controversial issue, especially for Third World countries. Some people believe that GM foods not only provide larger yields to feed hungry citizens in Third World countries, but they can also be a source of great nutritional value. For example, researchers have developed a strain of golden rice containing high amounts of vitamin A and numerous other vitamins and minerals. Additionally, GM crops are laced with herbicides and pesticides, and therefore reduce the need for chemical consumption. Opponents of GM foods claim that they pose a threat to the health of consumers and that these crops could eventually cross-pollinate in an unregulated fashion or lead to the growth of superweeds and superbugs resistant to the herbicides and pesticides woven into the genetic fiber of the crops. Developed nations should promote research and monitoring from an ethical point of view and financial assistance through philanthropic ventures in order to limit environmental and health risks. They should also make sure that limited cultural displacement will result from the introduction of GM crops and that instead, a better livelihood and well-being through collaboration will emerge. Hence, GM crops should be introduced only provided that the developed nations assume the ethical and financial responsibilities for the environmental, health, and social consequences that attend this new innovation.