The Risks and Unknowns of Genetically Modified Foods - Research Paper Example

? The Risks and Unknowns of Genetically Modified Foods In the current society, humans have developed an addiction for controlling nature. This way, efforts have been directed towards technological advancements, ignoring the hard facts of nature self sustenance functions and cycles. It is worth noting that increased interests, in the pursuit of genetically modified foods presents, yet, another example for such addictions. A genetically modified crop often refers to a crop whose genes have been altered in order to satisfy some specifics. In most case, these is done through selecting, isolating and copying ideal genes in ensuring that a particular crop would sustain harsh environments or certain diseases of which naturally it could not, and eventually produces a larger crop yield. Maghari & Ardekani (2011) indicate that genetically modified crop can be manipulated so that they can resist diseases and insects, as well as tolerate herbicides, which eventually, leads to production of high nutritional crop value. As of current, there are approximately 148 million agricultural lands that have been commercialized for purposes of cultivation of genetically modified crops. Canada, United States, china and Argentina have been cited as the leading regions where genetically modified crops are grown. Research has indicated that genetically modified foods are more popular amongst developing countries since through impressing this technology, these countries often strive to alleviate poverty and hunger. Consumers who are knowledgeable over the GM technology are often skeptical about its effects. It has been reported that GMOs, exhibit both harmful and unknown effects. For instance, it is cited that the environment is at a greater risk of losing biodiversity, and extinction (Skanche & Friedman, 2009). The risks emanating from genetically modified foods can either be environmental or health related. Environmental risks include the creations of super pests and super weeds. Generally, GMOs have been reputed for containing genes, which make them to be pest resistant. It is also noted that herbicide tolerant genes is a characteristics that make the GMOs to be resistant even after being sprayed by a weed killer. This is a characteristic that makes other weeds to be eradicated hence leaving the desired crop intact. Although proponents of GMOs boasts about the abilities of the crop to resist pests as well as reduced chemical application, such pest resistant genes often come with risks. The effect on biodiversity as mentioned above has been one of the issues of major concern when it comes to the GM food. According to Pandey et al (2010), GM foods have the capability of spreading their genes to other plants, and in the eventuality contaminate wild plants natural genetic makeup. Given that plants have a direct contact with one another, it becomes impractical to isolate a set of plants from the surrounding wildlife, and this applies to planted cropland. The impact of GM food on the environment is not only a concern that arises from the international growth of GM, but also its associated human health, which is a major factor in investigating the risks posed by GM foods. Maghari and Ardekani (2010) noted that some of the major issues concerning the effects of GM foods on human health has remain unknown for many years. Safety testing methods of foods are poor and considering the fact that GM foods have been recently introduced, long term effects still remains unknown. The deepest concern could possibly lie on the GM food toxicity, and the potentiality to introduce new strains of allergy. Maghari and Ardekani (2010) have pointed out that, animals whose testing has been done have shown negative reactions ranging from premature births, abnormal births, infertility, abortions, illness and death. Critics have it that considering the signs observed in animals, it is most likely that humans are at an increased risk of experiencing similar results (Skanche & Friedman, 2009). Adding to toxicity, Pandey et al (2010) explains that increased frequency concerning food allergies is a matter of concern. As such, they have pointed out that, injecting of genes in plants has the potential to create new allergens or allergic reactions amongst susceptible individuals. This propensity is supported by Maghari and Ardekani (2011) who observed that Indian villagers and cotton handlers developed skin rashes through contact with GM crops. By and large, the socio economic hazards have been associated with GM foods. It worth noting that the introduction of genetically modified foods has changed the way farming practices are carried out. These changes have adversely affected farmers since adapting to the new practices is somewhat difficult. Farmers have been pushed to purchase GM seeds with a view that production will be increased (Skanche & Friedman, 2009). If the farmers continue to practice their traditional method of farming, they risk being sued by multinationals which patent certain GM seeds (Pandey et al., 2010). Due to the patenting of the entire crop, farmers have been forced to purchase and grow GM crops or risk the legal consequences. In this regard, the concerns of consumers have been on multinationals for which the concern has been generating profit in disregard to alleviating hunger or protecting the environment. Social activists have raised concerns over the aggressive productions and marketing GM crops as being related to the ability to patent this GM crops t. In contrast to conventional crops, patenting is never possible since they are naturally created. Alarming rates of privatization and monopolization has instilled fear amongst consumers since the right to choose on the method of food production is slowly getting out of hand. As miller, (2011) points it out, concerns on whether EC and other WTO members will consider developing and maintaining a multilateral regulatory system over GMOs has been raised. It has been viewed that the system if adopted would help enforce precautionary measures that go a long way to act as guiding principles for any further research use of GM foods. There are various notable differences existing between EC and WTO concerning the effective use of GM foods. As such, the raging debate between the three regimes offers no possibility of a common decision. Unless some synergistic energy is developed by each of the regimes, we stand to lose when the catastrophic event occurs. It until then that, al regimes will come to an understanding that humans and nature are all interconnected, and thus regimes should tolerate other legal regimes for the well being of mankind. Despite all the risks involved, advocates of GM food still claim that significant benefits can be achieved through genetic manipulation of crops. Their major argument is that, GM foods have the ability to reduce herbicides and pesticides usage since they contain a pest resistant gene and more nutritional value could be realized through manipulation of minerals and vitamins (Skanche & Friedman, 2009). However, the claimed advantages have been false fully overemphasized. In the same context, (Maghari & Ardekani, 2011) explains that most of the GM nutritional claims have been exaggerated and indeed they are false. For instance, they reveal that, protein content in genetically modified soybean and potatoes did not measure any higher than in the conventional soybeans and potatoes. Additionally, Maghari & Ardekani, (2011) indicates that most of the research underway is carried out by the private sector, thus, creating a biased decision for those after higher productivity since they are brain washed to believe that genetically modified crops are much better that conventional crops. It becomes important for continued research to avoid such monopolies. If the current trend remains, the popularity of GM is to reach much higher levels in the coming years (Maghari & Ardekani, 2011). Before we settle on a complete transformation of the agricultural practices, it is paramount that we improve our regulations, international policies food, food safety testing and food labeling (Pandey, et al., 2010). A survey carried out by Kayabasi and Mucan, (2011) in which 609 were interviewed concerning their attitudes on GM foods, majority of their responses reveled that, they had concerns over the health risks and an honest labeling system. As earlier noted, it can be summarized that the general public yearns for a transparent handling of this matter. Indeed, it is morally wrong to produce food and distribute it knowing very well that it has been genetically altered, and worse, keeping customers in darkness. Nonetheless, GM foods threaten the peaceful environment and have the capability to threaten our well being. It thus becomes important for proper policies and labeling systems to be established with a view of safe guarding customers. References Kayabas?, A, & Mucan, B. (2011). “An Empirical Study of Consumer Attitudes and Perceptions toward Genetically Modified Foods (GMF)”. European Journal of Social Sciences 25(1), 52-65. Maghari, B., & Ardekani, A. (2011). “Genetically Modified Foods and Social Concerns”. Avicenna Journal of Medical Biotechnology, 3(3), 109-17. Miller, A. (2011). “Debate of genetically modified organisms used in food”. US-China Law review, 8(2), 137-157. Pandey et al., (2010). “Genetically Modified Food”. Its Uses, Future Prospects and Safety Assessments. (2010) Biotechnology, 9(4), 444-58. Skanche, J. L & Friedman, L. W. (2009). Genetically modified food. Detroit,MI: Greenhaven press. Read More