Safety of GMO Foods - Report Example

Safety of GMO Foods of the of the Concerned Professor April 19, 2011 The Audience Analysis Once again my target audience is the group of students taking Ivy Tech’s online English 111 class and my professor, Carrie Kendall. The only contact I have with any of my fellow classmates and professor is through the Blackboard website. By names I can differentiate between male and female but as far as personal attributes, I can only make assumptions based on logic and the information they chose to give from personal accounts in their writing assignments. One major conclusion that I can safely attribute to my target audience is that a majority of them are affiliated to affluent and economically developed economies. Though it is ideal to be detached and objective while judging the issues as the one under consideration, yet, hunger and emotions have logic of their own. Perhaps my target audience may have the patience and emotional detachment to delve systematically on the pros and cons of the safety aspects of GMO foods, those amongst them who are from developing countries where food scarcity and hunger are a pressing problem, may choose to respond with a different type of logic as compared to those who are from the developed nations. While for the denizens of the developed world and the middle class and rich segments from the developing world, ethical and environmental risks associated with GMO foods may be of prime importance, those who are well aware of the dynamics of hunger, GMO foods with their ability to offer high yield may sound the right thing happening at the right time. Safety of GMO Foods Introduction The topic attributed to the proposed synthesis paper is as to whether the genetically modified foods are safe for human consumption? The intended goal of this synthesis paper is to extend to the target audience a holistic perspective regarding the augmenting controversy associated with the multibillion dollar GMO food industry. For the nations grappling with hunger and food scarcity, it stands to be a conclusive and sound premise that genetically modified foods or GMOs portend a huge technical possibility of planting crops that yield a desirable harvest on a sustainable and persistent basis. Owing to the exponentially expanding world population and the partially successful attempts of the third world countries to somehow come to terms with the pervasive food scarcity, GMOs sound virtually a pragmatic way out of widespread famines, allowing farmers to grow insect resistant and weather hardy yields on a continuous basis, in the areas where conventional crop strains are hopelessly failing. On the other side of the problem, one simply cannot attempt to ignore the opinion of millions of stakeholders and pressure groups, who are really concerned about the medical and biological effects of the genetically modified foods on them, on their family members and on the generations to come. I will certainly try my level best to practice impartiality while delving on views attributed to both the sides, so as to allow the readers to form their own opinion pertaining to this issue. Pros of GMOs According to Toke (2004), genetically modified foods are the only ray of hope, so far as the gargantuan task of feeding the ever increasing world population is concerned. Besides, going by the fact that a large number of people in the third world do not have access to balanced nutrition, genetically modified foods can be used to provide these people with the necessary and requisite minerals and vitamins in their diet (Toke, 2004). Though, the opinion of Toke is valid, it is primarily focused on one side of the issue only. There is one other group of opinion makers who say that a large chunk of the world food production is consumed by pests (Pilnick, 2002). So genetics can be used to produce seeds that are resistant to pests (Pilnick, 2002). This fact is really heartening, but it fails to take into consideration the possible impact of removing a pest from an eco system. Humans label an organism to be a pest if it harms them economically by destroying the agricultural yield. However, that same organism may also be an important link in the affected eco system. It sounds really appealing to hear the possibility that genetically modified strains can be grown in environments that are quite different from the environment in which the naturally grow (Kellow, 2002). Who would not marvel the possibility of growing strawberries in the Sub-Saharan Africa? Going by the fact that the world climate is fast changing, genetics could be used to help farmers deal with the falling yield owing to climatic changes. However, their also exists the possibility that introducing a new crop in an area could or perhaps may have devastating or harmful influence on its ecology. Cons of GMOs There exist a large number of people who deplore the consumption of genetically modified food as they may be detrimental to human health (Atherton, 2002). Besides, many people are allergic to certain foods. Some say that genetically modified foods may have new types of allergens which could be bad for human health (Atherton, 2002). Though Atherton (2002) agrees that there exists no direct evidence of the harm caused to human health by GMOs, yet he also points out that until today no detailed study has been undertaken to detect the influence of GMOs on the human health. Atherton (2002) also suggests the possibility that though the geneticists can come out with GMO crops that produce their own insecticide and pesticides, still there exists the probability that over the years certain pests may develop resistance to these GMO crops. The suggestion made by Atherton is valid and there exists ample scientific and documentary evidence to prove that pests over time develop resistance to the pesticides intended to destroy them. However, rationally speaking, this possibility existed even when the farmers protected the produce by using insecticides, without resorting to GMO crops. So if eventually the pests develop resistance to GMO crops, it does not diminish the importance of high yield made possible by them in the meantime. The third world stakeholders are concerned about the economic implications of GMO crops. Research and development in biotechnology requires ample investment. Therefore, most of the private companies investing in GMO research do tend to get their products patented to reap large profits over a long period of time (Bozeman, 2007). Hence, their lays a valid and feasible chance that once the GMO crops manage to replace the regular crops, these companies may charge the third world farmers exorbitant price for the seeds produced and supplied by them (Bozeman, 2007). Many of the third world farmers may not afford to buy the seeds produced by biotech companies. This is inhuman and unethical. It goes without saying that such possibility do poses grave ethical questions before economists and scientists. Yet, it in no way dilutes the potential of GMO crops to eradicate hunger and dearth. Conclusion The quintessential fact is that be it any discipline, that are economics, science or ethics, its eventual objective is and should be the betterment of human life. The rampant hunger in the developing nations necessitates the adoption of scientific solutions that have the power to eradicate food scarcity. Yet, care needs to be taken to assure that the scientific solutions used to eradicate hunger are not detrimental to human health and environmental and ecological well being in the short and long run. This dilemma raises many more questions than the answers it provides. References Atherton, Keith. (2002). Genetically Modified Crops: Assessing Safety. London: Taylor & Francis. Bozeman, Barry. (2007). Public Values and Public Interest: Counterbalancing Economic Individualism. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press. Kellow, Aynsley. (2000, March). Risk Assessment or Decision Making for Genetically Modified Foods. Review: Institute of Public Affairs, pp. 3. Pilnick, Alison. (2002). Genetics and Society. Philadelphia: Open University Press. Toke, Dave. (2004). The Politics of GM Food. New York: Routledge. Read More