"The first large acreage plantings of GM crops--herbicide tolerant soybeans and canola--took place in 1996 after successfully passing U.S. regulatory review. Since then, additional GM crops with herbicide tolerance, insect tolerance and virus resistance have been given clearance for planting and consumption. These include varieties of corn, sugar beets, squash and papaya. All of these crops have been assessed for food and feed safety in producing countries, and many more countries have approved the import of food or food ingredients that contain GM products. Hundreds of millions of meals containing food from GM crops have been consumed. There has not been a single substantiated instance of illness or harm associated with GM crops. "
Though many discourage how different types of vegetables and fruits are being genetically modified, research has shown that there are benefits present in the consumption of the genetically modified food. Food that have obtained the trait of herbidicide tolerance, insect tolerance and virus resistance have lasted longer. There has been now association with illness or harm from the crops and thus, GMF have shown to have only positive results from the U.S. regulatory review. It seems as though many people are over reacting against GMO's and have denounced them publically to the world. However, GMO's allow for cheaper products and creating food that lasts longer and survives the harsh environment of the world.
Good points, except GMOs cannot survive the harsh environments of the world. In india, the inability to stand a drought caused the crops to fail and resulted in the loss of millions of livelyhoods. It is true that in the US, the crops have been very succesful. Anybody that claims that GMO crops always fail is a sure sign of bias, there have been many success stories as well as failures.
ReplyDeletethese crops by the GMO have succed and do have many benefits but droughts and other things could conflict them
ReplyDeleteNot even droughts, in india, there have been repeated failures in the best climates.
Deleteoh really cooleo
DeleteI can see why people would disagree with the use of GMO's, but the benefits of GMO's outweigh the possible cons. It might very well be one of the only ways to provide more food for more people as the population of Earth expands.
ReplyDeleteGMO's are actually useful so I agree with you.
DeleteI agree too, because making your apple rounder is better than the possible cancer and death that could follow!!!!
DeleteYah Lorenzo preach it!
DeleteI think that they could be useful only if companies like Monsanto couldn't be immune to the law and actually for once take the necessary precautions and test their dna that they insert into their seeds. But we all know that wont happen because Monsanto sucks.
DeleteI can see how GMO becomes beneficial but in the world of Genetic Engineering there are some horror stories with GE. I have heard stories with the CEO's of this company beginning to contorl the world flow of crops with the ability to turn genes on and off and to have crops fail or succeed. However these are radical beliefs we all know that someone will attempt it.
ReplyDeleteactually, those are not stories. Over 80% of your food is GMO. the companies really do control the flow of food, a farmer is forced to go back over and over again to the company to buy crops every year, giving the corporations full control. The ability to turn genes on and off is pretty common, it is called RNAi, or RNA intereference. It was discovered in Cold Spring Harbor, and has become increasingly popular ever since.
DeleteWikpedia article : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_interference
the ability to silence genomes is not just a horror story, heck i'm even taking a class on it over the summer.
ALso, look up terminator gene.
-Lawrence Marino
ReplyDeleteThe root to this GMO concept (like almost everything in this world today) comes back to money. In the last sentence it says how GMOs are cheaper. The priority is for the money and not for the people consuming the food. If cases of sickness and other negative things about GMOs occured, would money still be put in question? Even over a person's wellbeing?
GMOs are inherantly superior to unmodified foods, farmers can easily buy unmodified seeds, they just don't because they don't offer the superior yields that modiified seeds do. The fees farmers have to pay every year to use montosano seeds is an investment, they don't HAVE to buy the seeds they WANT to.
ReplyDeleteActually, they have too. The first year, they think that the seeds will be good for them. It may or May not be. The reason they buy the seeds is advertising, the adas make them look good. Then, after everybody buys the seeds, the source of non modified seeds ceases to exist because farmers usually save their own seeds. They dont buy them. When they grow the GMO crops, they dont save seeds of the un-modified crops, so they don't have those anymore. Theen, they have no choice but to keep buying those seeds from monsanto or dupont or whatever, because it is the only source for seeds they have. they may or may not want to, but they have no choice. Gmo seeds are not always superior, look up "BT cotton farmer suicides."
Deletehttp://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/02/18/171896311/farmers-fight-with-monsanto-reaches-the-supreme-court
DeleteGMOs are inherantly haughty to unmodified foods, farmers can easily buy unmodified seeds, they just don't because they don't offer the superior yields that modiified seeds do. The fees farmers have to pay every year to use montosano seeds is an investment, they don't HAVE to buy the seeds they WANT to.
ReplyDeleteYou and Tafheem have very similar positions.
Delete