Are Transgenic Food Good for the Humanity?

According to a Boston University research, genetically modified organisms are living

things whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering. Genetic engineering is

the modification of an organism’s phenotype by altering its genetic make-up (BU). Currently

they have greater presence in foods from transgenic plants such as corn, barley or soybeans. The

genetic manipulation means the introductions to new qualities in crops. Some benefits of

transgenic foods are that we can consume a more sophisticated cuisine containing more vitamins,

minerals, proteins, and low fats. Crops are more resistant to virus or insects, they have more

conservation time, increases production, and lowers the costs of agriculture. Genetically

modified crops purposes are the resistance to certain pests, diseases, or environmental

conditions, or resistance to chemical treatments.

In recent discussions about healthy food, a controversial issue has been the concept of

genetically modified foods. On the one hand, some transnational businesses argue that the

promotion of transgenic plants is essentially based on two ideas: increased productivity and the

possibility of ending hunger in the world (NCBI). In this article, the authors claim that the

incorporation of the insecticide into the plant makes it more efficient in the fight against certain

parasites, this means greater productivity. Ecologically, this new insecticide distribution

technique represents a much more localized the same use, avoiding their dispersion in the

environment. Furthermore, they claim that transgenic aliments could finalize with the hunger, the

problem is the distribution of them.

 Based on the previous article, some scientists defend that transgenic foods were invented

with the purpose of eradicate malnutrition because global population is growing. The regulation

of this new technology with social practices and influences would let the society grow equally

and sustainably, but the food security would not be operated for transnationals, which purposes

are the maximization of benefits and the appropriation of the product. As opposite, Massieu

defends that “it would increase the poverty because the desolated lands will need more

chemicals” (Massieu, 3). According to Massieu, this new technology was a good benefit for

society, but at the same time is not good enough because this new technology was invented only

in order to make money. Current knowledge are not enough to evaluate the benefits and to know

about the health risks and environment effects.

Supporting the above information, some believe that potential hazards are enormous.

Existing genetic structures have evolved over millions of years forming an infinitely complex

and interconnected ecosystem. Now, scientists are ruining this delicate balance with changes that

would not occur naturally. This is being done extremely quickly without sufficient care for the

consequences. Genetic engineering is not the same as crosses between which has been practiced

for many years. It is not an exact science (CRG). For example, it could result in some dangerous

organisms becoming resistant to antibiotics, it could result in weeds and insects becoming

resistant to pesticides and herbicides, or you could even accidentally create new poisons and

diseases. The food comes from nature, if we change the fundamental structure of a food, you

could create disease, hunger, ecological tragedy, and chaos. Moreover, transgenic food can

produce some negative effects in human health and in some animals because they represent a

potentially danger for some countries as a result of the economic goals those countries have with

their brutally maximization (Abi).

 In order to get rid of world hunger, there has to be significant leaps in food production

and equal equitable distribution. The issue is that there are potential trade-offs in achieving these

leaps, trade-offs that can potentially have an adverse on the environment. Producing enough food

and achieving equitable distribution is a great challenge because to rid the world from hunger,

while reducing negative impacts on the environment is quite complicated. But, it is in this

context, in which “genetic manipulated foods are promoted in the name of the fight against

hunger and malnutrition while ensuring sustainable use of natural resources” (Fernandez, 4).

Endorsing what Fernandez suggests, the development of genetically modified foods can help the

fight against hunger and malnutrition. The problem with the genetically modified foods is that it

lacks a sustainable use of natural resources as they have stated that they are safe for consumer

health. Where it is said that after several years of being introduced to the market of genetically

modified crops and foods, food insecurity and inhabits that increases each year.

My own view is against genetically modified foods because you can see the problems

that can cause in humans and the environment. Genetically modified crops represent a threat to

small producers because that culture model these foods have, they concentrate control of

agriculture and food in a few hands, and the corporative increment concentration destroys

freedom of choice and raises prices. In the environment, transgenic crops generate genetic and

clay pollution, loss of biodiversity, development of resistance in insects and weeds. The

resistance has been achieved in these foods makes use more potent herbicides which leads to

increase pollution of land. In addition, these can be filtered and reach groundwater thus

producing more environment problems. In health, it is possible the development of some agents

which could produce allergies or intolerances.

 Moreover, as to social aspects, “process of monopolization produce concentration of

agribusiness in hands of a few multinational corporations, destroy peasant economy, regional

markets, create dependency from foreign technology and therefore increase the price of basic

food and destroy food security and sovereignty at regional and national level” (Oswald, 1). That

means the country should take some economic and strategic risks because of the lost in

biodiversity, troubles in exportation trades, and lost in security and food sovereignty. In addition,

some transgenic vegetables like soybeans and corn are being used interchangeably and mixed

with non-modified cereals. This, together with the lack of control legislation and labeling of

these products, makes the consumer do not have the right to know what he or she is choosing and

eating or if they are or are not eating modified food. So, many of this negative effects help

people to defend their interests, right to life, healthy environment, etc. because we do not know

for sure that transgenic food are not contaminated and do not produce effects in our health. How

Charles Benbrook argues, “there is no credible evidence that GMO foods are safe to eat”

(Benbrook). It means that science has not been done to clarify us if we are eating healthy food or

we will be intoxicated.

In conclusion, there are many ethical issues related to the growing and consumption of

genetically modified foods. They hold potential to increase the productivity of crops as well as

the environmental pollution, while at the same time they were invented to fight against hunger as

well as the health problems. These controversies need to be looked at by all humans since

everyone is directly affected by the choices. While each person can read these details and come

to different conclusions on the value of genetically modified foods as well as the ethical choices

being made by the companies in charge of producing these foods. Moreover, the lack of

observed negative effects does not mean they cannot occur, and some scientists defend that
science is not taking care about some of this problems such as ecological disasters and food

safety.

Works Cited

Genetically Modified Organism. sphweb.bumc.bu.edu. Boston University. Web. 8 May 2016.

Buiatti, M., P. Christou, and G. Pastore. "The Application of GMOs in Agriculture and in Food

Production for a Better Nutrition: Two Different Scientific Points of View." National

Center for Biotechnology Information. Genes & Nutrition. Springer-Verlag, 18 Oct.

2012. Web. 9 May 2016.

Abi, G. "Advantages and Disadvantages of Genetically Modified Food." CalorieBee. N.p., 22

Mar. 2016. Web. 10 May 2016.

Consumer Genomics. “Frequently Asked Questions.” Council for Responsible Genetics., 23(3).

Summer 2000. Web. 10 May 2016.

Fernandez Suarez, Maria del Rocio. “Alimentos Transgenicos: Que Tan Seguro Es su

Consumo?” revistaunam.mx. Dirección General de Servicios de Cómputo Académico-

UNAM Ciudad Universitaria, México D.F., 10(4). 9 April, 2009. Web. 5 May 2016.

Oswald, Ursula. “Transgenic: effects in Health, Environment and Society. Bioethic reflection”.

revistaunam.mx. Dirección General de Servicios de Cómputo Académico-UNAM

Ciudad Universitaria, México D.F., 1(3). 1 January, 2001. Web. 5 May 2016.

Benbrook, Charles. “Reasons Why GMOs Are Safe to Eat and Environmentally Sustainable”

forbes.com Jon Entine, executive director of the Genetic Literacy Project, Forbes opinion.

14 Oct. 2013. Web. 5 May 2016.

Massieu Trigo, Yolanda Cristina. “Cultivos y Alimentos Transgenicos en Mexico. El Debate,

Los Actores y Las Fuezas Sociopoliticas” scielo.org.mx. Argumentos (Mexico, D.F.),

22(59) Jan/Apr. 2009. Web. 6 May 2016.