This sample paper on Genetically Modified Organisms Gmos offers a framework of relevant facts based on the recent research in the field. Read the introductory part, body and conclusion of the paper below.
Genetically Modified Organisms Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are taking the aspects of genes that people like the most and infusing them into another gene. These GMOs are used to make plants live through pesticides and herbicides, drought, and Just about anything else that gets thrown at them. The problem with doing this is it not only makes the plants resistant to the chemicals but it also develops super weeds that can take on far more chemicals than the original ones.
Now there is far more residue on people’s food and because GMOs are not labeled, people have no idea what they are eating.
Not knowing what is being injected can cause some serious health problems relating to the immune system triggering an allergic reaction. In order to free a person from the everyday worries of ingesting these GMOs into their body with or without their knowledge, genetically modified organisms should be banned.
When it comes to GMOs our knowledge is minimal. Until we can learn more about them they should be banned. The splicing of genes is how genetically modified organisms are made.
Referred to as genetically engineering (GE), DNA from one species is injected into another species to create what nature cannot. These plants, animals, bacteria, and viral genes are relatively new to us. In the 1990s, a California company, Calegne, came out with the first GE tomato, Flavor Savr (“Introduction”).
This tomato was created so that it wouldn’t get soft when it ripens. This made it easier to pack and ship the tomatoes. By 1998, 25% of corn and 38% of soybeans were genetically modified (Maynard). Genetically engineered soy and corn are found in 60% of processed food (Maynard).
Since the beginning of the development of a pesticide called Roundup it has raised many concerns. Roundup and other similar herbicides and pesticides are used to kill eeds and pests without killing the plants. The plants have been modified to with stand these chemicals. The increase of the amount used increases the residue on our food. It has also caused the development of pesticide resistant super weeds because of the increase. In 2010, it was reported that almost 366 million acres of genetically modified crops were planted throughout 29 different countries (“Introduction”).
While the United States is busy being the leading country in GM crops, Europe is working towards a Europe-wide ban on all GM crops (“Introduction”). Again, these genetically modified organisms are new to us. We need to ban them before the possible long term effects take a toll on our people and animals. Genetically modified organisms have a short history, which serves as an issue for long term studies. Since GMOs have only been out since the 1990s, they remain relatively new to us. There have been studies conducted on animals, but as of 2011 there was only human study published.
It concluded that the genetic material that was injected in to GM soy transforms into bacteria that lives inside our intestines (“Genetically’). We may even have these continuing to grow inside of us after we stop eating GM products. The studies on humans Just simply are not there to evaluate. Animals, on the other hand, have had many short term studies done on them. One study Touna tnat (5M soy affected tne ovaries, uterus, or testlcles In rodents (“Genetically’). Another said that the kidney, thymus, spleen, gut, brain and the immune systems in rats had changes after eating GM potatoes (Verzola).
One was done that resulted in the deaths of most of the baby rats after a mother rat fed on GM soy (“Genetically’). A study on hamsters again proved to be something wrong with their reproduction. After about three generations of GMO fed hamsters, they could o longer have babies and if they did they usually died (“Genetically’). Some of the hamsters were reported as having hair growing inside their mouths (“Genetically’). These are all examples of some of the short term studies done. If there were long term studies conducted then we would be more aware of the dangers of genetically modified organisms.
Long term and short term studies do not make a difference when it comes to the possible allergic reactions that these genetically modified organisms can trigger. In the United Kingdom soy allergic reactions have increased by 50% (“Genetically’). A skin prick test was done with GM soy and wild soy. The results were people reacted to the GM soy but not the wild soy (“Genetically’). This supports that GMOs have higher level of irritants in them to cause these reactions. Lack of labeling almost caused a huge problem with a company in Brazil.
Soybeans from Brazil were found with a type of nut gene in them (Maynard). The company that purchased the soybeans tested it to see what gene types were injected in it. Luckily they discovered the nut gene before the soybeans were distributed. This type of modification to the enes could have caused many problems with people allergic to nuts. The lack of labeling and the amount of reactions go hand in hand. If these companies were to label their products then people will either know not to purchase it or if they do and have a reaction then they know where to trace the source of the GMO.
Labeling must also be done because the United States has six major GMO crops grown in the U. S: soy, corn, canola, sugar beets and alfalfa (“Genetically’). With these genetically modified crops our processed food is made. With the corn and soy alone, 60% of are processed foods are produced. Between 1996 and 2008 the percentage of adoption of corn, cotton, and soybean genetically modified crops have increased from between 0-20% to 60-90% (“Rapid”). This growth in the amount of GM crops out there has made it difficult to not eat GMOs.
Many sources out there have all said that if a person wishes to not eat genetically modified food then organic is the way to go. We already know that some GMOs can contaminate other crops so even organic farmers are in danger of them no longer being the product they originally expected. If these were banned then we wouldn’t have to worry about allergic reactions or the ontamination of our other crops. When genes were first beginning to be spliced, a company started making plants which had the ability to not be affected by large amounts of pesticides/herbicides.
The large amounts of pesticides/herbicides caused the plants to become resistant and in turn grown into super weeds. The development of these super weeds caused farmers to spray larger amounts of these pesticides/herbicides onto their crops. The resistances don’t stop at super weeds. If the antibiotic gene injected crops spread then they too can develop a resistance for antibiotics (“Genetically’). People who ngest these specific genes could also develop a resistance to antibiotics. This can prove to De extremely dangerous IT tne person Is to Tall serlously Ill ana already nave an antibiotic resisted system.
The British Medical Association wanted to ban all antibiotic genes in GM food so that we can avoid developing an antibiotic resistance in our immune systems (Verzola). When it comes to our health and antibiotics when our health is weak, we should be doing everything to avoid developing antibiotic resistant systems. This is our health we are discussing. We have been growing crops since the beginning of time. There is no reason to try to change the ways we have been doing it when it has proven effective. If we stop allowing them to have genetically modified crops then the threat of antibiotic resistant immune systems ceases.
People who are for genetically modified food argue that these foods can save the world. To have crops that are able to survive during a drought can save some struggling countries. Some people say that starvation is much worse than anything the GMOs cause (“African”). If the productivity of crops is increased then countries will be able to feed the fast growing populations. Even if the rich were to give other ountries free food, the population will still suffer. Poor countries depend on agriculture for their income, so increasing productivity via biotechnology can impact the outcome of the crops and their wallets (“Economist”).
The FDA said that GM foods are the same as non-GM foods so they do not need to be labeled. These foods, although, are not the same. One can cause many problems while the other is all natural and doesn’t have any effects. They also say that the things like cancer and long-term damage to the immune system can’t be directly connected to the use of GMOs (African). Long-term are the key words in their own argument, no long term tudies have been conducted which basically makes us blind to the possible long- term effects.
There is a very strong chance that if the studies were done there could be a link found between cancer, weak immune systems, and GMOs. Although some people argue that genetically modified organisms are going to save the world, we simply don’t know that much about their effects. The lack of knowledge of what we are really putting into our bodies can end up causing more problems than we think. GMOs should be completely banned because of the possibilities they have. The allergic reactions can at least be lowered by labeling the products that do contain GMOs. Super weeds could mean chaos when it comes to this new development.
We don’t know what these genetically modified organisms can do to our plants, let alone humans. People don’t want to put food in their bodies when they have no idea what was put in the food to begin with. Maybe after twenty years of studying the long-term effects of GMOs my mind could change on this subject, but as of right now too much information is still missing. Even if people do believe that genetically modified crops can help feed the world it has yet to be proven. The effects of GM crops in the long run can prove to be far worse than hunger in the world.
No one really knows what is going to be the result in the future, but I don’t like the results in the present as it is. The production of genetically modified organisms needs to be stopped. We are causing more harm to what has been naturally practiced since the beginning of time. We have always learned how to adapt to our environment when it comes to agriculture and biotechnology was never involved until recently. Stop it before it takes over the world as we once knew it to be: all natural and safe to consume. African American Environmentalist Association. “Genetically Modified Foods Should Be Produced to Feed the World.
Global Resources. Ed. David M. Haugen. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2008. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from “Genetically Modified Foods. ” 2005. Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 21 Oct. 2013. Economist, The. “Genetically Engineered Foods Should Be Produced. ” Global Resources. Ed. Helen Cothran. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from “Feeding Five Billion: New Agricultural Techniques Can Keep Hunger at Bay. ” The Economist (10 Nov. 2001). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 6 Nov. 2013. “Genetically Modified Foods Could Pose Numerous Health Risks. ” Genetic Engineering. Ed. Noel Merino.
Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from “Doctors’ Health Warning: Avoid Genetically Modified Foods. ” Vol. 1 . 2011. Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 21 Oct. 2013. “Introduction to Genetically Engineered Food: At Issue. ” Genetically Engineered Foods. Ed. Debra A. Miller. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. At Issue. Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2013 “Rapid growth in adoption of genetically engineered crops, 1996-2008. ” Genetics and Genetic Engineering. Barbara Wexler. 2009 ed. Detroit: Gale, 2010. Information Plus Reference Series. Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Web. 7 Nov. 2013. Maynard, Cindy. “Genetically Engineered Foods: An Overview. ” Genetically Engineered Foods. Ed. Nancy Harris. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2003. At Issue. Rpt. from “Biotech at the Table. ” Current Health 2 27 (Nov. 2000): 22. Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 21 Oct. 2013. Verzola, Roberto. “Genetically Engineered Foods Have Health Risks. ” Genetically Engineered Foods. Ed. Nancy Harris. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2003. At Issue. Rpt. from “The 1999 GE Food Debates: The Turning Point. ” Synthesis/Regeneration (Winter 2000): 24. Opposing Viewpoints In Context. web. 21 oct. 2013.