Abstract
Genetic modification is the direct manipulation of the genetic makeup of organisms and is especially common within the agricultural industry. This paper shows that during recent years, the appearance of genetically modified foods in the marketplace has spawned much heated debate in the public arena regarding the ecological and human health factors. The paper explores some of these issues and examines the views of those who are pro-GM and their critics.

From the Paper
"The ISP report claims that not only have GM crops failed to increase yields or reduce herbicide and pesticide use, they have cost the United States an estimated $12 billion in farm subsidies, lost sales and product recalls due to transgenic contamination (Independent pp). Moreover, in India, massive failures in "Bt cotton" are up 100 percent (Independent pp). Moreover, triple herbicide-tolerate volunteers that have combined transgenic and non-transgenic traits are now widespread in Canada, and multiple herbicide-tolerant volunteers and weeds have emerged in the United State (Independent pp)."

Tags:manipulation, herbicide, tolerance, AgBioWorld, Foundation, environment

Abstract
Genetically modified foods have emerged as a topic of great controversy in recent years. As agricultural technology grows by leaps and bounds, the presence of enhanced and or modified foods becomes more ubiquitous at grocery stores and on dinner tables. However, this proliferation has been met with concern by many people who fear that the new foodstuffs will have environmental ethical and human consequences that the proponents of such items are as yet dimly aware. This paper explores the environmental implications of genetically modified food.

Tags:genetically, modified, foods

Abstract
This paper looks at the many potential and proven benefits resulting from the usage of genetically modified organisms such as longer lasting and better tasting fruits and vegetables, crops that require less use of pesticides, and improved nutrient content in certain foods. The author also examines specific problems with using such organisms.

From the Paper
"The scientific and social communities are currently engaged in a heated debate about the benefits versus the risks of Genetically Modified foods. The benefits are predicted to aid the agriculture community and humans while the risks are expected to also affect the ecosystem and humans negatively. Two specific examples of GM's soybeans and corn---are currently in the forefront in this controversial and unresolved issue."

Tags:agriculture, consequences, corn, ecosystem, farming, genetic, gmo, soybeans

Abstract
The paper examines the "Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Schmeiser" case and the decision of Canada's Supreme Court to give agricultural multinationals the power to penalize and to bring before the courts farmers who find themselves the inadvertent possessors of patented seed products. The paper argues that this case is an example of patent protections being expanded in ways that ultimately hurt farmers, endanger the environment, encourage greater genetic modification of foodstuffs and cause genetically modified foods to find their ways onto the plates of ordinary Canadians in ever-increasing numbers. The paper is of the opinion that the inability of the Court to appreciate the long-term consequences of its decision will cause hardship for many.

From the Paper
"The following paper will look at the ongoing debate about the genetic manipulation of foodstuffs with an eye towards exploring whether or not the expansive patent rights recently granted to plant seed developers such as Monsanto is an example of forward-thinking jurisprudence by the Canadian Supreme Court - or an instance of short-sighted legal reasoning that will create more problems than it will solve. Such a paper is important because genetically modified foodstuffs - courtesy of powerful multinationals - are more prevalent now than ever before and the likelihood that the foods we eat will be foods engineered in a laboratory somewhere is an issue which should be of the utmost concern to anyone who has reservations about eating such items and/or reservations about the ecological and environmental ramifications of introducing into an agricultural ecosystem a living organism that nature has not on its own seen fit to introduce."

Tags:patented, seed, products, multinationals, agriculture, organics

Abstract
The term GM foods or GMOs (genetically-modified organisms) is used to describe agricultural crops and plants which are grown for both human and animal consumption, through the use of techniques from the science of molecular biology. This paper examines the heated debate which surrounds the topic of GM products. In many third word countries, GM products are associated more with big business and money and less with help for poverty stricken countries. The paper shows that, nevertheless, the prevalence of GM produce cultivation and usage is on the increase globally. The paper includes a graph.

From the Paper
"Despite these aspects, there is a large body of dissent and opinion against GM products in the third world and elsewhere. Much of this disagreement originates from developing counties, particularly in Africa. There are many reasons given for the opposition to GM crops. The central argument against GM products is that many feel that these foods have not been tested enough over a sufficient period of time. Many critics also see the use of GM product in third world countries as a form of experimentation. There is also a high degree of awareness throughout the word of the possible dangers of tampering with the genetic composition of foodstuffs."

Tags:Monsanto, biotechnology, B.t, crystal

Abstract
This paper briefly presents some of the arguments posed for and against the use of genetically modified crops. It then discusses Monsanto's ambitious attempt at forcing genetically modified foods into the marketplace and the resulting loss of public confidence in genetically modified foods. The paper also discusses government policies concerning genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and what role activism should play regarding the use of GMOs.

From the Paper
"The question of whether genetically modified organisms are beneficial or a safety hazard has been debated continuously since the 1980s. Proponents of genetically modified foods claim that this technology reduces the amounts of herbicides and pesticides necessary to kill weeds and insects on crops, allows for the production of more nutritiously enhanced foods, and it also helps developing nations grow much needed crops that may support their populations (Lazaroff, 2000). Opponents to genetically modified foods argue that altering the natural genetic structure of plants could irreversibly change all crops through cross-pollination, could harm wildlife, or could create strains of herbicide resistant weeds that could take over entire crops, resulting in economic disasters and food shortages (Barboza, 2001)."

Tags:agricultural, regulation, foods, wildlife, banned, european, markets, cross-pollination

Abstract
This paper examines the assumption that the gene revolution--represented by the integration of genetic engineering techniques into the field of agriculture--is capable of positively affecting the current human population crisis. The study examines this very ideological assumption that has not largely been challenged in the popular or critical literature on the subject. It then attacks that assumption and illustrates its erroneous base.

Table of Contents:
Chapter One: Introduction and Statement of Problem
1.1 Statement of Problem
1.2 Purpose of the Study
1.3 Importance of the Study
1.4 Scope of the Study
1.5 Rationale of the Study
1.6 Definition of Terms
1.7 Overview of the Study
Chapter Two: Literature Review
2.1 Scope of the Literature Review
2.2 Intensification of Production is Favourable
2.3 Intensification of Production is Unfavourable
Chapter Three: Methodology
3.1 Approach
3.2 Data Gathering Method
3.3 Database of Study
3.4 Validity of Study
3.5 Originality and Limitations
Chapter Four: Data Analysis
Chapter Five: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations

From the Paper
"In order to fully examine that relationship, it was necessary to critically examine literature, statistics, and historical examples that might shed some light on the relationship that exist between food production and population growth. Additionally, studies were consulted that spoke to the capacity for genetically modified foods to increase agricultural production. In all, the range of information required for this study was significant and at times may have appeared to stray beyond the limited scope of genetically modified food. However, in order to demonstrate the manner by which genetically modified food would have its greatest negative impact upon human societies, it was essential to take a broader look at the role that genetically modified foods have played in the intense push to intensify agricultural production year after year in order to presumably keep up with geometric population growth by always generating more food than is needed."

Tags:food, technology, biological, farmer, growth

Abstract
This paper explains that, although supporters of genetically modified agriculture claim that it increases crop yield, increases the nutritional content in the food and decreases the use of pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers; there are several concerns about the negative effects of this practice, especially for the Third World. The author points out that a major problem of genetically modified crops being used in the Third World is its cost for the seeds, which means that small farmers need to indenture to big firms, and, once genetically modified framing is used, soil nutrients are exhausted drastically and it becomes difficult to return to traditional farming with limited fertilizing. The paper urges that, while agricultural biotechnology is still young, the benefits and the risks of genetically modified agriculture should be considered more thoroughly especially its effect on the Third World even though this area suffers from lack of highly nutritional food.

From the Paper
"Some people, especially children, are highly allergic to certain types of foods like peanuts. According to Wesley Burks, the Chief of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, allergic reactions to genetically modified food are usually limited to the skin and respiratory tract. Symptoms include urticaria, angioedema, pharyngeal edema, wheezing, coughing, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain. Genetically modified foods may accidentally introduce a new allergen because modern technology makes genes possibly be introduced to totally dissimilar species, for example a cow gene can be put into a plant. Dr. Martha R. Herbert, a pediatric neurologist said that "with genetic engineering, familiar foods could become metabolically dangerous or even toxic." It is true that if the crop itself is not toxic or dangerous, it could still upset the complex biochemical networks and create new bioactive compounds or change the concentrations of those normally present."

Tags:allergy, wildlife, costs, traditional, indenture

Abstract
This paper presents a viewpoint in opposition to genetically modified crops, or genetically engineered foods, asserting that these plants may have dire consequences in the health of consumers, animals, and world hunger. The paper claims that the lands that farmers cultivated for generations are ruined by modified plants. It also states that genetically modified crops have herbicide and pesticide resistant genes that encourage stronger, more destructive weeds, which in turns forces farmers to apply more pesticide, compromising the health of their farms and defeating the purpose of a resistant gene in a modified plant. The paper mentions the Monsanto Company, noting that organic farms have been run out by big companies that provide genetically modified crops to farmers. The paper concludes that through research and advocacy of organic agriculture, the public can have access to non-GM crops and foods; and this should eventually result in supporting hard-working farmers and improving the world's economy.

From the Paper
"The lands that farmers have been cultivating for years and generations were ruined by modified plants. Soil is also harmed by the herbicides and pesticides that farmers spray on to their fields. The modified crops that they plant have herbicide and pesticide resistant genes that keep them from dying of the chemicals. What the resistance from the plants has done is that the weeds and bacteria have evolved to be stronger and better at killing plants (Pollack). This turn in evolution has caused frenzy in farmers and so they spray more and more of the chemicals onto their fields, compromising the health of their farms and defeating the purpose of a resistant gene in a modified plant ("The World" 4). The problems of the conditions of the soil on farms are far less than the problems of keeping organic farms in the U.S. and Canada. Organic farms have been run out by big companies that provide genetically modified crops to farmers and pay them to plant. The infamous company in U.S. and Canada is Monsanto Company. Currently in Canada, there are no more organic canola oil farms because they have been contaminated by genetically modified canola, making them no longer organic (Rees 3-4). Supporters of Monsanto and GM foods say that farmers have a clear choice between picking GM crops and natural foods. The farmers in fact would like to have natural crops completely on their fields but the contamination of GM crop seeds make it very difficult to keep their seeds clean (Rees 4)."

Tags:DNA, world, hunger, starvation, shortage

Abstract
The paper argues against Prakash and Conko's belief in "Technology Will Save Billions from Starvation" that the technology of genetically modified foods and the attendant agricultural practices is an ecological boon and a nutritional miracle. The paper asserts that the purported nutritional benefits of genetically modified food can be found naturally in organic produce. The paper then dispels the myth that there is a need for more food and reveals that technologies which allow the production of more food still have not solved the problem of growing hunger. The paper notes the concerns regarding genetically modified foods and contends that the 'green revolution' is of great potential harm, not just to Africa, but to the entire world's future food supply.

From the Paper
"One of the benefits of biotechnology, according to Prakash and Conko, are that plants can be engineered to hold greater nutritional benefits, such as "higher quality protein, lower levels of saturated fat, increased vitamins and minerals, and many others" (426). Of course, there is already a type of farming which provides extensive nutritional farming, and that is organic. Unlike genetically modified foods, which have these nutritional benefits by virtue of scientific interference, organic farming allows foods to retain their natural nutritional character. The Organic Trade Association website discusses these enhanced (or rather unhampered) nutritional qualities of organic foods in detail, citing a number of scientific and academic studies as conclusive evidence. One study, conducted by the Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, found that rats fed on organic foods "were slimmer, slept better, and had stronger immune systems than those fed conventionally grown produce" (http://www.ota.com/organic/benefits/nutrition.html)."

Tags:organic, nutrition, Green, Revolution, farmers