Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Dangers of gmos
Genetically modified foods and the effects on humans
Why genetic engineering is bad
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Dangers of gmos
I believe that GMO products should be labeled. If I was going to consume something that has been fiddled with, I would want to know. I wouldn't´ really care what it is, I would just want to know what it has. Especially if I was eating certain foods with certain things in them. To illustrate my point, people around the world are already arguing about GMO products should be labeled or not. In the food industry company are deeply splitting over the labeling issue. Companies who sell GMO products say that labeling them wouldn't be necessary. The reason for companies who sell GMO to go against this is because they are afraid of losing their customers which will be losing their money. However, organic and natural companies say that people deserve to know and GMO hasn´t been proven if it's harmful or not. Many scientists have identified a variety of ways in which genetically engineered organisms could adversely impact both human health and the environment, while some people are simply saying, ¨It not harmful.¨ ¨Its safe.¨ or ¨What can a little change do?¨ …show more content…
Well, most studies have been done on animals although, some of those studies connect GM foods to altered metabolism, inflammation, kidney and liver malfunction, and reduced fertility. GE crops have the power to include new toxins and allergens in our food. Scientists also recently found GE insecticide in corn which is showing up in the umbilical cords of pregnant women. Other than all this, nobody really knows anything else that GMO products have done. So while they figure it out, shouldn't we be labeling our foods in the
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.
A very valid point brought up by Clause (Say ‘no’), Hemphill, and Banerjee (both G.M.O. and the U.S.), is that consumers already have an easy and effective option to steer clear from GMOs: buying organic products. Through Hemphill’s and Banerjee’s article, we are informed that United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) “presently offers an organic certification for crops and processed food products, which by definition prohibits the use of GMO ingredients” (Page 455-466). This is certainly a label that has the ability to help concerned customers know exactly what they are eating. The co-authors call this solution the “Voluntary Labeling Strategy.” There is, however, one issue with this: not all products that don't contain GMOs qualify as organic. The resolution lies in an upcoming proposal from the U.S. Food and Drug administration (FDA). It's called “Voluntary Guidelines” and it allows, but doesn't force, GMO-free products to display a label of their own. I believe that this is a much smarter option than labeling every item containing GMOs because it is not binding by law, which would provide consumers with all of the benefits they need to choose the right foods for their preferences, while saving on all of the unnecessary extra costs discussed
The technological advances are increasing each year, and electronics are not the only things upgraded. The food eaten in the United States has also been touched by science in the form of GMOs. Although GMOs have been in the US food industry for almost twenty years, consumers should have the right to know what is in our food with mandatory GMO labeling.
According to an article titled “Genetically Modified Foods Eaten” regularly by Linda A. Johnson today, essentially 40% of the foods we eat are genetically modified, unless you eat organic foods and/or you grow your own. Most products containing corn, soil, canola oil, or cottonseed oil contain genetic modification. One of the biggest genetic modification company is Monsanto (Johnson). She goes on to say many Americans don’t even know they are consuming genetically engineered foods. In “Genetically Modified Foods Confuse Consumers” by Mary Clare Jalonick writing in the Washington Times, has talked about how this is because the FDA does not require them to be labeled. Jalonick has said, “Genetically modified foods are plants or animals that have
Until the government creates mandates for issuing labels on foods that contain genetically modified ingredients, there are measures that can be taken by common citizens and supporters of GMO labeling in order to keep Americans safe in the meantime. Since “study after study points to potential health risks” (“Whole Foods Market”), supporters need to raise awareness amongst the rest of society in order to generate a large group that can begin to press the government to create a law to handle the issue. It is in “the state’s interest [to] protect consumers from false or potentially misleading communication or prevent consumers from suffering unwitting harms” (Adler). Moreover, the government must be the one to put an official end to the lack of
On the surface, there are two main actors in the conflict over GM foods; those who are for, and those who are against them. Unfortunately the situation is not nearly as polarized as that, with many key players falling in the middle of the spectrum.
So why aren’t foods containing GMO’s labeled? According to New York Times the F.D.A and U.S.D.A they don’t want to label foods containing GMOs because they don’t want to imply to people that these foods might be “different”. We are the only country trying to hide what is going on behind our food, when about 75% of our food in the US contains GMOs.
Products sold in Oregon that contain GMOs should be clearly labeled so consumers can make healthy and informed choices on the foods they decide to purchase. The use of GMOs in foods has drastically risen in the United States. The Non-GMO Project, a non-profit organization supports this by saying, “In the U.S., GMOs are in as much as 80% of conventional processed food”(Non-GMO Project). I decided to go shopping to try and find as many products as I could that were labeled GMO-free, I only found one product labeled GMO-free.... ...
According to Galyna Sidyelyeva, “research has provided insight into the issue of the nutritional value of GM crops. For example, the Venneria group tested genetically modified wheat, corn, and tomatoes. They found wheat and corn are similar to their non-GM counterparts and tomatoes differ only in their antioxidant content, having a lower amount than their unmodified relatives” (50). With this in mind there are many people in the world today that may find value from GM crops; for example, in countries where people are starving. While the crops may not be identical to its non-GM counterparts, these countries will still profit from them. In “A dubious success: The NGO campaign against GMOs,” Robert Paarlberg asserts, “Unfortunately, in the case of NGO [non-GMO] campaigns against GMO crops, they typically emerge from rich countries while imposing consequences on poor countries” (228). As one can see, these rich countries may have succeeded in not allowing some GMOs in but to date in America they still are not labeled; so, they are only hurting the poor countries by trying to make a controversy over labeling that is
In the U.S., GM foods have received little public opposition; this is largely due to the fact that food manufacturers are not required to label their products as containing genetically modified ingredients for fear of confusing consumers. Due to the lack of evidence that genetically altered foods are harmful, the Food and Drug Administration considers GM foods to be “generally regarded as safe” (known as GRAS) and no special labeling is required (Falkner 103). In the U.S., genetically modified crops are monitored by t...
GMOs can also bear consequences in terms of genetic pollution and alteration, from 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. With all of the controversy surrounding GMO foods: health versus biodiversity; benefits versus dangers; pros versus cons, a topic that always arises is the subject of labeling. Labeling has been a matter of discussion for years and surprisingly, it is a hot debate that is still full of life.
This has created a large amount of debate on local, national, and international levels about the safety of genetically modified foods to human health. There are many angles that have been taken from different groups on this issue. Some believe it is harmful to our health, with one source stating that, “mice eating GMO corn had fewer and smaller babies (Jagelio 2013).” Without testing on humans how are we to know these harmful effects aren’t impacting our health and reproduction. Other groups see GMOs as being both beneficial and having no impact on human health.
An English doctor, named Arpad Pusztai, did a study on rats being fed genetically modified foods. His study found out that rats that ate genetically modified potatoes had pre-cancerous cells, smaller brains, smaller livers, smaller testicles, and damaged immune systems. After finding this out, he then changed the eating habits of the rats by interchanging between feeding them organic potatoes and genetically modified potatoes for two weeks at a time. He concluded that whenever the rats ate the organic potatoes, their symptoms disappeared, but when the rats ate the GMO potatoes again, the symptoms reappeared. Pusztai study isn’t the only that proves that GMOs are harmful. Other studies have also shown that GMOs are linked to reproductive problems, immune system problems, accelerated aging, gastrointestinal distress, and dysfunctional regulation. This proves that GMOs have a serious effect on our
The labeling of food made with genetically modified plants and produced from animals fed with genially modified food is completely voluntary. So basically the American consumer has no way to make informed choices. If by any chance any of these products cause adverse side effects in the future Americans are completely at the mercy of the retailers. The public has no way to make informed decisions of whether they want to eat genetically modified food or not. Upon further research I found out that there are over 40 plants varieties that have completed the federal requirement for commercialization. These approvals include foods with drugs in them, fish, fruits and nuts that mature faster, and plants that produce plastics. (NERC 2005)