Potential Environmental Implications of Biogenetic Engineering - Essay Example

The case of Biogenetic Engineering: What are the potential Environmental Implications? A. Introduction a. Introduction b. Thesis Statement: As the population increase, human needs more food as never before. Therefore, rise of the food production is necessary to do so. Base on the technology development, genetically modified food has become one of our “friends” for everyday life. This essay will point out the potential environmental implications through health impacts, environmental impacts and social impacts B. Labeling a. European GM food labeling b. North American GM food labeling C. Potential health impact a. Irritability b. Nutrition balance D. Environmental Impacts a. Natural Environmental effect i. The rise of Super weed ii. Effect other living beings b. Sustainable development i. Mass production ii. Law of conservation of mass E. Social impacts a. Monsanto b. Seed produce and selling i. Imparity Clause F. Destabilizing Society a. Unknown impact b. Everyday threatens G. Conclusion The case of Biogenetic Engineering: What are the potential Environmental Implications? Introduction The world has been changing significantly over the last decades. The population increased significantly and there was need to come up with ways to ensure the population is well fed. Scientists and researchers introduced the genetically modified organisms and foods. These foods have changed the world by ensuring food security. However, the scientists failed to verify some things, they thought could be issues in the future for instance allergic reactions. These issues have emerged through studies and research, causing many concerns on these life-changing organisms. In addition, the fact that large biotechnology companies conceal the information on the genetically modified organisms fuels these concerns. Closer studies and research on genetically modified foods indicate that these organisms are not sustainable. Genetically modified organisms do not align with the conservation of matter principle because of the genetic alterations. The potential ecological, social, and environmental impacts of the genetically modified organisms ascertain the concerns. As the population increase, human needs more food as never before. Therefore, rise of the food production is necessary to do so. Base on the technology development, genetically modified food has become one of our “friends” for everyday life. This essay will point out the potential environmental implications through health impacts, environmental impacts and social impacts Labeling Labeling the genetically modified foods in the North America, European Commission and in other countries has elicited a never-ending debate. Experts argue that it is necessary for the consumers to make a choice on whether to take genetically modified foods or not (Davison, 2010). Labeling foods containing genetically modified organisms varies among countries. In some countries, it is mandatory to label all foods containing genetically modified organisms while in some it is voluntary. This causes a conflict of interest for the businesspersons involved in selling genetically modified foods internationally (Davison, 2010). A trader from a country with voluntary labeling for genetically modified foods may have their products returned if they export the foods to countries where labeling is necessary, if they do not label. In fact, this is the greatest difference between North America and the European Union (Davison, 2010). In North America, it is voluntary to label genetically modified foods while in Europe it is mandatory. All other countries have either strict genetically modified organism’s regulations like Europe or soft regulation like North America (Davison, 2010). North American GM food labeling North America is one of the largest producers of genetically modified foods. According to the Scientific American Volume 30 editors (2013), more than 70% of all foods sold in the United States contain genetically modified organisms. A large percentage of foods in Canada especially those with processed sweeteners contain genetically modified foods. The United States and Canadian governments have an obligation to protect their citizens from genetically modified foods harm (Davison, 2010). As such, the two countries’ governments perform stringent tests for the genetically modified foods before approving them for sale. There are many departments for this purpose (Davison, 2010). Although the American and Canadian governments carry out many tests for genetically modified foods, the producers and manufactures of these foods can label or not depending on their preference (Fantel, 2013; Davison, 2010). Genetically modified foods producers in United States and Canada can label or not label their genetically modified food products. In that case, some of the food on the supermarkets may contain genetically modified organisms yet the customers may not know (Fantel, 2013). Fantel (2013) points out most experts and consumers believe this is a strategy by the government to protect the genetically modified foods producers and manufacturers. Some of the largest manufacturers of genetically modified foods are very influential. Monsanto, which is probably the largest genetically modified foods producer in the world, is very powerful and influential. Fantel (2013) suggests that Monsanto genetically modified organisms’ policy infects all the government institutions. Sustainable business news (2013), notes that the American government acts as the Monsanto’s sales representative. Americans are suspicious of the government and large genetically modified foods producers’ conspiracy and want the American government to enact the genetically modified foods labeling policy (Sustainable Business News, 2013). European GM food labeling The European Union is very strict with genetically modified foods. In the late 1990s, European Union laws on genetically modified foods were not strict. Strictness of the genetically modified foods in the European Union gained momentum after the passing of the GMO regulatory laws in 2003 (Davison, 2010). According to Davison (2003), the new European Union Laws on genetically modified foods included the freedom of choice, safety, labeling, and traceability factors. In this case, the genetically modified foods in the European Union must have a label indicating they have genetically modified ingredients. The consumers have the freedom to choose the genetically modified foods or other foods depending on their beliefs and discretion (Davison, 2010). All genetically modified foods for sale in Europe should have less than 1% of genetically modified constituents. In addition, the place of origin has to be available on the foods exported to the European Union. This is important for returning all the genetically modified foods that fail to meet the requirements (Davison, 2010). Although primary approvals on whether to approve genetically modified foods in Europe is by the European Food Safety Authority, individual European Union States can have the right to ban genetically modified foods if the state have reasons to believe the foods are harmful to humans, animals or the environment (Beckmann, Soregarolli, and Wesseler, 2006). The European States can use the safeguard clause under the European Union Agricultural regulations (Beckmann, Soregarolli, and Wesseler, 2006). These rules and regulations under the safeguard clause led to the banning of more than twenty genetically modified foods in several European Union countries including Greece, Hungary, Germany, France, Austria, and Luxembourg. The ban of some of the genetically modified foods in these countries raised an intense debate. International organizations had reasons to believe the banning was unjustified (Ricroch, Berge, and Kuntz, 2012). Potential Health Impacts Although genetically modified foods have improved food security across the world, there are potential health effects caused by these foods. According to Smith (2007), scientists believed genetically modified foods could have health impacts from the initial stages. However, there was no way of testing genetically modified for health impacts before humans take them. Smith (2007), points out human beings had to take genetically modified foods severally to determine whether these foods caused any health risks (Smith, 2007). Genetically modified foods cause some health risks as the United Kingdom Health Department found out. United Kingdom is unique in that it carries out food allergies research every year. The allergy research in 1999 at York laboratory confirmed that genetically modified soya from United States increased allergic reactions (Smith, 2007). Irritability Irritability and allergic reactions are common with genetically modified foods especially Soybean. As stated above, the United Kingdom Research on allergies confirmed that allergic reactions reported increased to over 50% after genetically modified soybean was availed in the United Kingdom (Smith, 2007). The allergic reactions were more common in children compared to adults. Some adults and children experienced irritable bowel movement after taking the soybean. Netherwood and colleagues (2004) and Kleter and Peijnenburg (2002) imply genetically modified foods produce allergens because of the changes in DNA. These changes lead to unpredictability, which in most cases produces allergens. In addition, the use of microorganisms in genetic modification increases the chances of producing allergens. The microorganisms for genetic modification are custom to withstand many natural processes including heat and chemicals. These facts create a good environment for producing allergen (Netherwood et al, 2004). Netherwood and colleagues (2004) point out that bacteria used or the genetic modification of soybean may produce allergens when it settles in the human gastrointestinal tract. Smith (2004) also found out that genetically modified foods could cause allergies even when humans do not take them. In his research, Smith found out that people living near cornfields of the genetically modified Bt Maize were susceptible to allergic reactions when the corn was pollinating (Netherwood et al, 2004). Nutritional Balance Genetically modified foods have nutritional balance issues according to critics. Research indicates that nutrition of some of the genetically modified food changes significantly. The main reason for this is the introduction of the new genes to the DNA of an organism (Ackerman, 2002). In addition, the engineering of the organisms to produce many tastes and nutrients may weigh down the production capabilities of the plant. In that case, the organisms will produce many nutrients whose qualities’ may be lower than that of the normal plant. In the end, it may seem like the genetically modified organisms do not add any value. In fact, there are concerns that the genetically modified organisms are not sustainable (Whitman, 2000). Environmental impacts Natural environment effect: Super weed The rise of the super weed is one of the major disadvantages of the genetically modified foods. Ackerman (2002) suggests that genetic modification of many plants leads to the development of herbicide resistance weeds. Research indicates that there is form of gene transfer from the genetically modified plants to weeds. Butterflies, bees and other insects play an important role in the transfer of pollen grains from the genetically modified plants to the weeds. The genetically modified pollen DNA modifies the DNA of the weed making it resistant (Ackerman, 2002). Effect on other living beings Genetically modified plants also have an impact on other living beings. Ackerman (2002) and Whitman (2000), argue that genetically modified foods upset the natural ecological balance. According to Ackerman (2002), insects like the caterpillar feed on the leaves of many plants. Although they are harmful to the plants, these insects play an important role in the natural ecological balance. When the caterpillars and other insects feed on the genetically modified plants, adverse effects leading to death follow. The mass death of these insects is likely to alter the ecological balance, which could have severe consequences in the future (Ackerman, 2002). In addition, the genetically modified foods also have health effects on domestic as well as wild animals. They have the potential to cause allergic reactions, which lead to death (Whitman, 2000). Sustainable development Mass production Genetically modified plants and animals are increasingly becoming popular in the world today. They have changed the world in many ways especially in the third world countries, where food security is a major problem (Ackerman, 2002). Mass production of genetically modified plants has become common in both developed and developing countries. Data indicates the acreage of land set aside for the genetically modified plants is quite large. United States and Argentina alone have more than 99 million hectares set aside for genetically modified plants (Smith, 2007). According to Maghari and Ardekani (2011), the land set aside for growing genetically modified organisms is increasing at a rate of over 10% per annum. With that regard, the land for growing genetically modified organisms will be more than 200 million hectares by 2015. Law of conservation of mass Genetic modification promises to conserve many plants especially the endangered species. Research indicates that conversation scientists and environmentalists can use the genetic modification to preserve the endangered species. However, the genetic modification does not align with the law of conservation of mass. This law states that a system must remain unchanged for some time to conserve the mass. Genetic modifications alter the mass of any system within a short period. As such, the mass is lost with genetic modification. With that regard, it is correct to state that genetic modification is unsustainable (Ackerman, 2002). Social Impacts Genetically modified organisms have elicited a debate on their safety in humans, animals and the environment. Many people across the world worry that these concerns could affect their lives significantly. Recent studies indicate that although the organisms used lack the mobility genes, they can easily acquire them from neighboring genes (Smith, 2007). This can cause severe diseases, which can disrupt the social norms dramatically. In addition, there are concerns that the genetically modified organisms are slowly changing the ecological balance (Maghari and Ardekani, 2011). Monsanto Seed produce and selling Monsanto is arguably the largest genetically modified organisms’ producer, with more than 80% of the market share. The company holds many patents of genetically modified seeds and procedures. Monsanto does not label the genetically modified organisms, since it is voluntary in the United States (Stone, 2014). Most of the products in most American supermarket shelves come from Monsanto directly or indirectly. The Company is so powerful and influential that it influences major government legislations affecting genetically modified organisms. According to the reports by Stone (2014), Monsanto spent billions of dollars to prevent residents of California and New England from enacting laws tasking Monsanto and other genetically modified organisms companies to be more transparent on labeling the products. Americans and other citizens across the world using Monsanto products are worried the products could be harmful (Stone, 2014). Imparity Clause The genetically modified seeds are relatively expensive compared to normal seeds. This fact has led to disparities in especially the developing countries where most farmers are poor (Maghari and Ardekani, 2011). In fact, many farmers in the developing countries struggle to make ends meet. In that regard, they cannot afford the expensive genetically modified seeds. Although the genetically modified organisms can change the developing and under-developed countries significantly, it is practically impossible. These disparities contribute to the disparities in food security between the wealthy developed and the poor undeveloped counties (Maghari and Ardekani, 2011). Unstable society Unknown impact The society has changed its perception on the genetically modified foods over the years. Although the genetically modified foods promise to change the world significantly, a lot is unknown (Smith, 2007). The current research and studies, which have shown that genetically modified foods, may have adverse health effects have contributed to this. It is dawning to the society that the large biotechnology firms dealing with genetically modified foods conceal a lot of information (Smith, 2007). The fear of the unknown is fast catching up with many societies across the world, and could affect the genetically modified organisms market significantly. Everyday threatening The day to day events in the current times raises a lot of questions whether genetically modified foods really improve the lives of people or will eventually harm people. As stone (2014) implies, the large genetically modified organisms’ producers are working day and night to ensure what they do with the organisms remains concealed. Logically, a person goes the extra mile of concealing information when they are doing something bad. In that regard, it is plausible that the large biotechnology corporations like Monsanto are aware that the organisms they produce are capable of causing body harm. In fact, many research studies indicate that the genetically modified organisms are harmful to some extent Smith, 2007). This is raising many concerns and most people feel threatened by the genetically modified organisms. Conclusion Genetically modified foods promise to change the world completely. Many places affected by hunger and food insecurity can be food secure and sustainable with the genetically modified foods. Different regions regulate the use and production of the genetically modified foods differently. While labeling of genetically modified foods is mandatory in Europe, labeling is voluntary in North America. There are other regulations under the authority of the agricultural organizations in the different jurisdictions. Although genetically modified organisms can change many places, they are potentially harmful. Recent studies verified that genetically modified foods cause allergic reactions in addition to possible viral and bacterial infections. In addition, the genetically modified organisms threaten to change the ecological landscape by enhancing the growth of unwanted plants. These issues raise concerns whether genetically modified organisms are sustainable or will be unsustainable in the future. In addition, the hidden agenda by the genetically modified organisms’ manufacturers fuels the concerns more. It is important for these organizations to address the current challenges of genetically modified organisms and be more transparent to make the world better. References Ackerman, J. (2002). Altered Foods, GMOs, Genetically modified foods. Retrieved from www.science.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/food-how-altered.html Beckmann, V., Soregarolli, C, & Wesseler, J. (2006). Coexistence rules and regulations in the European Union. American Journal of Agriculture Economics, 88(5), 1193-1199. Davison, J. (2010). GM plants: science, politics, and EC regulations. Plant Science, 178(2), 94-98. Fantel, W. (2013). State of fever: Monsanto’s GMO policy infecting all levels of government. Retrieved from www.corncopia.org/2012/07/state-of-fever-monsantos-gmo-policy-infecting-all-levels-of-government/ Kleter, G. & Peijnenburg, A. (2002). Screening of transgenic proteins expressed in transgenic food crops for the presence of short amino acid sequences identical to potential IgE binding epitopes of allergens. BMC structural Biology, 22, 8-19. Maghari, B & Ardekani, A. 2011. Genetically modified foods and social concerns. Avicenna journal of medical biotechnology, 3(3), 109-117. Netherwood, A. et al. (2004). Assessing the survival of transgenic plant DNA in the human gastrointestinal tract. Nature Biotechnology, 22, 2. Ricroch, A., Berge, J, & Kuntz, M. (2012). Is the German suspension of MON810 maize cultivation scientifically justified? Transgenic Research. 19 (1), 1–12. Scientific Americans editors. 2013. Labels for GMO foods are a bad idea. Retrieved from www.scientificamerican.com/article/lables-for-gmo-foods-are-a-bad-idea/ Smith, J. (2004). Bt-Maize (corn) during pollination may trigger disease in people living near the cornfield. Smith, J. (2007). Genetically Engineered Foods may cause rising food allergies-genetically engineered soybeans. Retrieved from www.responsiblebiotechnology.org/gmo-dangers/health-risks/articles-about-risks-by-jeffrey-smith/genetically-engineered-foods-may-cause-rising-food-allergies-genetically-modified-soybeans-may-2007. Smith, J. M. (2007). Genetic Roulette. The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods. Fairfield: Yesl Books. Stone, J. (2014). Occupy Monsanto. Retrieved from www.occupy-monsanto.com/tag/gmo/ Sustainable Business News. (2013). US Government is Monsanto’s sales rep, and other GMO organizations. Retrieved from www.sustainablebusinessnews.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/25165 Whitman, D. (2000). Genetically modified foods: Harmful or Helpful? Retrieved from www.csa.com/discoveryguides/gmfood/overview.php Read More