The Unknown of the Genetically Modified Foods - Research Paper Example

? The Risk and the Unknown of Genetically Modified Foods This paper examines national and international differences and explains the dimensions of formulating attitudes in the area of biotechnology with respect to genetically modified foods (GMOs). Despite the apparent benefits of GM foods, GM foods face market challenges if consumers distrust and feel insecure toward GM food products. The paper develops qualitative analysis that identifies major determinants of consumer behaviors and choice toward GM foods; moreover, the paper establishes consumer attitudes and beliefs regarding risks of GM foods. The analysis establishes that consumer background and diversity influences significantly intentions to purchase GM foods, which further suggests comprehensive study of consumer market to understand fully differences in market segments and the way they respond to GM food issues. Risks of GM foods in the analysis include uncertainty or lack of understating regarding GM food and potential environmental hazards of GM foods, which influence consumers’ attitude negatively toward GM foods. The paper discusses and traces relevant concerns and crucial issues facing GMOs prevalent in food supply in US and other nations across the globe. Instead of the paper addressing policy issues, the paper analysis intends to provoke thought in analysts as a way of determining whether GMOs are, ultimately worth the risk or rather they should be reduced or banned entirely in foods. The paper offers relevant information to prove that GM foods should be restricted until further knowledge is derived regarding the effects of GM foods on human health. Even after two decades of debate on genetically modified foods, concerns still abound regarding the safety of GM foods and the debate persists as an essential issue in the world. Consumers in various nations are extremely cautious regarding GM food issue due to several factors. Most notably, there have been publicized food scares in US, Europe and Asia leading to negative development of negative attitudes toward GM foods. As well, inadequate knowledge and awareness about GM foods, the absence of trust in professionals and regulators to administer risk influence consumer perception of GM foods. Moreover, increased trade and globalization boosts exchange of food products among trading partners, which further complicate the issue of food safety management; thus, making people reluctant to embrace GM foods fully (Martinelli, Karbarz and Siipi, 2013). Resistance to change is inherent in individuals and usually serves to defend human beings from threats of the unknown. For a long period, humans have pushed the boundaries and experimented outside their zone of comfort and recommendation, which brought about space exploration, advanced science and technology. However, pushing the envelope seems to interest only certain individuals in the society to engage in the unknown making only those individuals involved comfortable with their performance. Therefore, from such an understanding it is obvious that expecting society to fully engage in an activity that may entirely be beyond their comfort zone is neither advantageous nor ethical, which is the situation regarding the use of GMOs in food supplies across the globe. Though scientific manipulation of plants and other organisms provides the world with more productive crops, the fact remains that extend of drawbacks exhibited in genetically modified organism are not entirely understood. Hence, incomplete knowledge existing with regard to GMOs in food led many nations to ban them entirely; although the US and several, other developed, nations still embrace GM foods. The reason GM foods exhibit clear and definitive concern for human population regards the unknown level of impacts GM foods pose to human health. Nevertheless, societies deal differently with ambiguities resulting from advances in technology, depending on how much uncertainty a community can tolerate. Especially useful in this analysis is the uncertainty avoidance index, which was developed by Hofstede and Hofstede that inversely relates acceptance of new products and reflects extend to which society members attempt to cope with anxiety and reduce uncertainty. Seed companies forbid the sale of their seeds for independent research reducing any attempt for independent research, which can draw inference with regard to whether GMOs are harmful, neutral or beneficial. The fact, seed manufacturers include a caption indicating that their products cannot be sold for independent research sheds a level of doubt in minds of readers regarding the overall health impacts the use of GMO may present for any society’s food supply (Martinelli, Karbarz and Siipi, 2013). Safe food is food, which under normal or foreseeable circumstances of use and at each level of production, processing and distribution never causes adverse effects to human health, life or the environment. Assessing potential risks is often carried out by comparison with convectional products while considering the various aspects of GMOs. Besides, safety and environmental aspect, there are socio-economic concerns, attitude, public knowledge, confidence in institutions responsible for making decisions and ethical concerns, which shape consumer perception of risks resulting from GM foods. Some of the GM foods in the market have a proven built-in resistance to certain types of antibiotics; for instance, Amflora, a genetically modified potato recently tested by European committee found a specific gene built-in the potato that predispose antibiotic resistance. Even though, the presence of this genetically modified potato may have little or no effect on human beings, its mere existence and presence of antibiotic resistant gene in genetically modified foods alerts the consumer of the serious concerns about health, which may exist with regard to GM foods. One loophole GM foods have leveraged on their working into food supply in the US and other countries across the globe is the statement given by the US’ Federal Drug and Administration (FDA) agency in 1996. The notion, which led the GM foods to enter into food supply in the US and other developed nations, was the understanding that FDA utilized a process to approve GM foods. However, the declaration of FDA only indicated substantial equivalence or the idea that any new food product, which is equivalent in composition and nutritional qualities to the existing food, it could be considered safe similar to conventional foods (Maghari and Ardekani, 2011). Even though, it can be understood where FDA came from in making the declaration, individuals opposed to GM foods are worried with the unknown harms of GM foods. Various researches offer that GM foods pose harmful effects to human health hence people are mindful not only of these proved harmful effects but also the sheer level of unknowns which are capable of wreaking havoc to human health and the environment in future. Proper scientific risk assessment requires scientific knowhow, though controversies regarding risk evaluation abound in scientific community. Hence, this makes people to lie within their safety considerations depending on justification provided by both scientists and the media. For instance, alarming results and pictures of rats bearing tumors after taking biotech foods, which resonated in the media, opened a renewed concern in citizen-consumers against biotech applications in food and feeds, which motivated criticism of biotech. Hence, the question of trust is inherently embed in safety discussions since progressive collection of uncertainty presented above show GM foods as bio-objects that cross back and forward the boundaries of safe/unsafe and well known/unknown. Therefore it is worth considering the way controversial relationships between intrinsic ambiguity of science and citizen-consumers’ desire to eat what is harmless and the way to manage food safety. Currently, citizen-consumers are quite aware of uncertainty features in the scientific knowledge; however, they do not demand for or expect “zero risk” but they complain that these uncertainties are never taken seriously enough in making decisions regarding GMOs in food. This is partly a rationale for people’s unwillingness to take GM foods if there are no perceived benefits for taking GM foods. This deficit model of thinking even though criticized on theoretical and empirical grounds, it is worth noting that this assumption is a common way of thinking within the scientific community that shapes public engagement initiatives, science communication and policy making (Nganje, Wachenhiem and Lesch, 2009). Even though, the discussion of GM crop safety/dangers to human health remains a sensible topic to the public, GM techniques can develop plants, which are dangerous to human health. However, the likelihood never implies the use of GM procedure deliberately leads to dangerous outcomes. Therefore, the concern in a literal form has no definitive answer as science innovations continue; hence, offering a simple answer for the query regarding the safety of GM foods is impossible, which is contributes to the feeling of being unsafe in using GM foods. Another aspect of concern in GM foods regards animal health, which is often ignored since human health concerns contribute huge share in research in GM field of food. Considering means by which bees and other pollinators regularly interact with plants to continue the cycle of pollination and reproduction indicate slight change can disrupt and potentially have disastrous impacts on plant life as exhibited on the planet. Even though, mass death of honeybee population could be related to the use of GM material, although it is merely one hypothesis, which is possible. Hence, it would be considerate to suspend GM use in such endeavors until the time when this phenomenon is fully understood fully and developed to a high degree. Moreover, another concern regards fact studies on the overall use of pesticide tonnage per acre compared to non-GM crops, which indicate increased usage of pesticides in GM crops. The year 2007, farmers applied more pesticides compared to the period before the introduction of GMO in the system, which has a disastrous impact on pollinators like honeybee due to the exposure to high levels of pesticides. Another potential impact in protecting GM food in the field is the creation of new super weeds, since the evolution demands species to accommodate changes or face extinction; hence, weeds exposed to GM and high use of pesticides adapt becoming tougher. This results in many problems including resistance of these weeds to the main pesticides and chemical showing that farmers have to go great heights than they did before the introduction of GM crops. The primary level of impact of these actions mainly affects the greater environment; for example, a situation in which a GM crop goes horribly wrong and eventually becomes extraordinarily difficult to manage and invades unintended areas. Human history has various instances where exported plants and animals became disastrous in the regions they were not intended; therefore, people gain a level of inference from such circumstances to sheer horror GMO plants can impact the environment. Moreover, the impact and means of evolution should also be considered; even though, GMOs have only been understood in the 20 years, they potentially have unprecedented and unforeseeable consequences regarding the environment where they exist. Therefore, GM food crops may find ways for distributing genes to wild plants, turning such plants into weeds. Though genetically modified food holds great promise, they also hold the same great potential that results in disastrous drawbacks. Although not the intention of this paper to resist technology in feeding earth’s burgeoning population, the fact remains, the use of GM material to influence this end is very risky even though it cannot be determined with existing evidence. It is thus, the understanding of this analysis that due to the high risks of unknowns, GMOs must necessarily be restricted to testing phase only. Even though, the US remains the world’s most economically powerful nation, it should consider the actions taken by European Union and other nations that banned importation and inclusion of GM in food product supplies. Through such actions, potential health and safety concerns for future generations can be assured together with the health potential and safety of the environment where such potentially harmful, scientific organisms would exist. A decade after commercialization of GM seeds indications show that consumers take GM foods in the US; even though, they perceive that the foods are somehow unsafe. Hence, it is with this concern that the paper advocates for GM foods to be restricted only to testing until further breakthrough in the risks posed by these products are better understood for the sake of human health and future generations. Besides widespread use of GM products, the continued use of the product continues regardless of consumers being relatively uninformed regarding biotechnology and prevalence of GM ingredients in food products. References Maghari, B., & Ardekani, A. M. (2011).Genetically modified foods and social concerns. Avicenna Journal Of Medical Biotechnology, 3(3), 109-117. Martinelli, L., Karbarz, M., & Siipi, H. (2013). Science, safety, and trust: the case of transgenic food. Croatian Medical Journal, 54(1), 91-96. doi:10.3325/cmj.2013.54.91 Nganje, W., Wachenhiem, C., & Lesch, W. (2009). A Comparison between Perception of Risk and Willingness to Serve Genetically Modified Foods. Journal Of Food Distribution Research, 40(2), 57-71. Read More