Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Genetically Modified Organisms, also known as Genetically Engineered Foods, are foods created from organisms that have had changes introduced into their DNA using genetic engineering procedures. These practices create new traits and have greater control over others when compared to previous methods, like selective breeding and mutation breeding. In 1996 Genetically Modified Organisms were introduced to the market. Since then, tons of people have eaten GMOs in various foods, such as soybeans, beef, dairy products, corn, sugar, etc. GMOs could be good and sometimes could harm people in society. Here is why. Even though the Government and the GMO industry say that these new crops are environmentally safe and that there is no nutritious difference between GMOs and conservative crops, GMOs should most definitely be labeled on food products because specific genetically modified organisms may be harmful and people have every right to know what is in their food.
The possible benefits of genetically modified foods are that it has a lot of nutrition in them, they taste better, people could spend less money producing more food, the use of pesticides and herbicides is less, they protect the soil, etc. In addition, consumers have the right to know what is in their food, especially if they have children and the health and environmental concerns have been raised on the foods. Labeling of GMOs will allow consumers to identify and have a clear view of the food products that may cause problems with their health. Majority of Americans support labeling of GMO foods, but that may have a huge effect on food prices. At least 22 countries have announced plans to institute some form of mandatory labeling (Phillips and McNeill, 2000). The United States could follow their lead in handling the logistics of product separation (P. Byrne, no.9.371). Due to religious and ethical reasons, many Americans would want to avoid GMO foods, especially the ones that contain animal products, including their DNA.
The problems that would be caused by labeling GMO foods would be that labeling the GMO foods would imply a warning about the health effects and consumers would not want to buy the food products anymore. Labeling of GMO foods to fulfill the needs of some consumers would also enforce a cost on all consumers. Consumers who would want to buy non-GMO foods would then want to purchase certified organic foods, which by definition cannot be produced with GMO ingredients. That would most definitely have a huge effect on food prices because then more Americans would want to purchase certified organic foods as well. Consumers have a tendency to have enough knowledge when looking at labels. When they see contains GMO ingredients they will put the food product back on the shelf and purchase the organic food choice. They may not be a better choice either, but compared to GMO foods consumers would most definitely purchase them. Organic foods are not proven to be better for your health or the environment either. In conclusion, labeling GMO foods has huge effects on the poor. GMO ingredients are supposed to be unsafe when in reality that may not be true. Poor people will become insecure about food and end up spending money on fast food because labels scare them away, causing them to spend money that they already do not have.
Furthermore, the most important reason why labeling of GMO foods impacted me as a researcher is because I am concerned about my health and others’ as well. We should have the right to know what we are eating or how many GMOs we are consuming in a day. This will allow me as well as others to have knowledge and to be able to choose which food product we want in our lives as well as our children. Labeling of GMOs will allow producers and consumers to have a stronger relationship in the long run. A stronger relationship between producers and consumers will allow the trust of farmers to continue to grow crops and sell them to the market. Also, producers would be able to make their way into the market. Consumers will most definitely be willing to pay higher prices for food products so industries will benefit from that and new players will develop. Throughout my research on genetically modified organisms, I discovered that the division between the government, public, and GM companies has the most debate when it comes to selling products. But in my opinion, I would want my food to be labeled also due to the damage that it could cause to the body.
In conclusion, even though GMOs could be good in such ways, they should still be labeled so that consumers can decide for themselves if they want to eat them or not. As stated before, GMOs have a negative effect on all aspects of life; not just for health reasons but also for economic reasons. Today the United States still has very restricted regulations for the production of GMO food products and has no clear labeling or plans for the distribution and use of these products. This way of life is still sort of new, and people have not seen the true effects that these types of foods have on our bodies and lifestyles and what it has in store for our future. In my opinion, I would want to know what is contained in my food products as well. My health is very important to me.
Works Cited
- Byrne, P. Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods. Food and Nutrition Series, Colorado State University, 2010,
The article Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods : Food and Nutrition Series is not peer-reviewed, but has a great credible party which is Colorado State University. The purpose of this article is to determine whether or not to require labeling of genetically engineered foods. This is an ongoing debate over the risks and benefits of food crops produced using biotechnology. The relevance of this article is how labeling GMO foods can benefit and protect Americans and how it could affect food prices. The audience of this article is intended to be Americans who are concerned about their health and the companies that would be affected by food prices. I believe this article also has authority because it is a credible source provided by another university.
- Moran, Lily. GMO Foods Have Not Proven Themselves Safe. Here’s What to Do about It. Newport Natural Health, Scholarly Article, 15 Oct. 2019,
This article describes the pros and cons of GMOs. Moran uses GMO manufacturers and unbiased research to clarify some of the pros and cons. In this article, the author revealed the ugly truth about GMOs: GMOs are way more general and harmful than we thought. Additionally, most Americans have been eating GMOs for years without even knowing it. Moran then describes the main point that GMOs can cause an increased risk of food allergies. Morans other main argument is that GMOs are not safe. This article is a reliable source due to its comparing and contrasting of GMOs. The author effectively uses a lot of other research to prove why GMOs are safe and not safe. I agree with the research on this source because GMOs are most definitely harming people and many have no clue about it.
- Goldman, Karen A. ‘Labeling of Genetically Modified Foods: Legal and Scientific Issues.’ Georgetown International Environmental Law Review 12.3 (2000): 717-60.
Karen Goldman is the main key player in this article. This article focuses on the procedures governing GMOs to see if the procedures remain relevant and applicable to the current state of GMO foods. She concludes that the FDA’s labeling requirements are not adequate, because they do not apply to GMO foods. She is an authority because she included a lot of convenient information and perceptions about the spread of GMO foods and how they help the markets. This research provided a good background for my study. This article is mainly for people who would consider the government to start labeling GMO food products for their safety. Also, this source helps make the case that GMO foods are not considered suitable because many of those engaging in the discourse surrounding GMO foods are outdated. This article is not peer-reviewed, but it was published by Karen Goldman.
- Weaver, S.A. & Morris, M.C. J Agric Environ Ethics (2005) 18: 157.
The major players in this article are Michael C. Morris and Sean A. Weaver. This article is peer-reviewed. This article presented scientific research on the importance of human health, animal welfare, and environmental risks associated with genetic modification. Theyre an authority because they want to inform people about the risks related to transgenic material which include fears about resistance and non-target effects of crops expressing Bt toxins, penalties of the use of herbicides associated with genetically modified plants, and the transfer of genes from genetically modified crops through vertical and horizontal gene transfer. The article has a serious tone. This article is peer-reviewed. I think this article has authority because it provides people with information on the risks associated with genetic modification.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.