Abstract Geneticallymodifiedfoods 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 modifiedfoods 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 geneticallymodifiedfood.
Abstract This paper argues that technologies for producing geneticallymodifiedfood (GMF) should be applied cautiously since such food may be dangerous to human health, the environment, and the economy.
From the Paper "The progression of science holds out the promise of new technologies that can solve urgent human problems. Among these problems are the international challenges of human hunger, malnutrition, over-nutrition and disease. Much funding and energy to solve these problems is currently being directed towards developing technologies to genetically modify foods. These technologies can and already have yielded tremendous benefits in addressing human crises. One example is the recent introduction of golden rice, normal rice that has been..."
Abstract This paper discusses the economic, social and health aspects of geneticallymodifiedfood and argues that left uncontrolled, geneticallymodifiedfoods represent an extremely serious threat to our future. The paper points out that the issue of geneticallymodifiedfood must be viewed as part of the general issue of how to control technology in a democracy and that this general issue must be addressed in terms of its moral, health, economic and social implications.
From the Paper "The world easily produces enough food to feed everybody very well could easily feed the world's population without resorting to these technologies. Although there is currently a plethora of famine throughout the world, there is also a failure to apply current techniques. There is a general lack of infra structure (food banks, for example) and, of course, poverty. If humanity collectively drew up a serious plan to overcome famine throughout the world, genetically modified foods would be unnecessary. The claim that they are needed to feed the world is nonsense."
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 geneticallymodifiedfoods 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."
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 geneticallymodifiedfoods 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)."
Abstract This paper looks at the many potential and proven benefits resulting from the usage of geneticallymodified 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."
Abstract The paper discusses the range of stakeholders regarding geneticallymodifiedfoods and examines the strategies used to address their concerns. The paper also explores the role of international organizations such as the World Trade Organization (WTO). The paper concludes that although technologies for geneticallymodifiedfoods offer dramatic promise for meeting some of the greatest challenges of the 21st century, levels of decision-making and legislation often serve as a deterrent to their implementation.
Outline:
Introduction
Stakeholders at the National, International and Local Levels (Government & Non-Government)
Strategies and Levels of Decision Making
Examples of Legislation Related to GeneticallyModifiedFoods Areas in which Stakeholders Agree and Disagree
The Role of International Organizations
Conclusion
From the Paper "The world's population is predicted to double in the next 50 years and ensuring an adequate food supply for this booming population is already a challenge. Scientists hope to meet that challenge through the production of genetically modified food plants that can help in warding off starvation as the world's population grows. As a result, in the past few years genetically modified (GM) foods have become the target of intense controversy, as competition among different stakeholders increase."
Abstract This paper examines the debate between the East and West on the issue of safety on geneticallymodifiedfood. The author looks at the argument concerning the food's safety, and possible effects on the human body, labeling of such products, and how the U.S. Food and Drug Administration use modifiedfoods.
From the Paper "The world as we know it is divided into two parts---the secular West and the cultural East. Both have different manners of living and while the West blooms in progress the East is more restricted as it looks for the morality and values behind the progress being made. In such a division controversies like genetically-engineered food bring home the difference as both the divides through the globe argue the safety of the food-albeit on different grounds. At the heart of the debate lies the argument that as yet, the effects of genetically modified crops and products on the human body are not known. However, there is no conclusive evidence of whether or not they can be harmful.."
Tags: east, west, FDA, poison, biotechnology, risk, label, population, health
Abstract This research demonstrates that not enough reliable evidence exists about the effects of GeneticallyModifiedFoods to determine that they are safe. The writer claims that geneticallymodifiedfoods should be banned until further testing, better evaluation methods, and valid studies on their safety and long term effects can be studied.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Problems with Testing and Assessment
Health Canada Proposal
United Nations Proposal
Environmental Concerns
False information
Withheld Information
Health Effects
Resistance to Antibiotics
New Allergens
Public Opinion
Fears
Controversy over Testing and Labeling Issues
Conclusion
From the Paper "Scientists claim that genetically modified foods (GMOs) can hold the key to the solution of many problems facing our world today. They have led to the development and production of new drugs, and could supply the answer on how to feed a growing population on limited space. The developers of Genetically Modified Foods report that they are completely safe and recite a list of our scientific advancements in the field in an attempt to gain public confidence. Farmers and grocery stores seem divided on the subject. Many grocery stores simply do not mention the subject as long as they are making profit. Farmers are divided and fear that if the public does not accept these new items, they will not buy them. In addition, farmers must be concerned about the long-term effects on their land. There are two sides on this issue, big business touts it as the greatest breakthrough of modern time, but skeptics are not so sure."
Abstract This paper analyzes the claims made in an article about geneticallymodified (GM) foods. The paper outlines the main arguments of the article, evaluates their validity and discusses the implication of the authors that GM foods are problematic.
From the Paper "This research examines an article on the subject of genetically modified (GM) foods with a view toward identifying and analyzing the pattern of ideas in the text and its argumentative cogency. The research will present a basic outline of the article citing its main argument and evaluating its validity with reference to other contributions to the discourse of GM foods. In their severe critique of GM-foods research and development..."
Abstract This paper presents an extensive review of literature and concludes that there is a lack of conclusive scientific studies about the nutritional status of geneticallymodifiedfoods. The author states that the industry is still in its infancy with lot of media attention and claims with no clinical validation. The author concludes that the need for further research in this area is seemingly endless, but the first step is to identify the markers needed to measure the dependent and independent variables.
From the Paper "One popular recent study claims that it has produced oil seed crops, which contain elevated levels of omega fatty acids, the same nutrients that make fish oil beneficial to the heart; at least this is how the mass media reported it. The real study, however, did not wish to infer that eating or cooking with their seeds would reduce the amount to fatty acids in humans. The product was being developed for the pharmaceutical industry. In this study genes that cause high concentrations of Omega-6 fatty acids in tobacco were transferred to borage seeds in an attempt to boost omega-6 levels in borage seeds."
Abstract This essay will argue that no geneticallymodifiedfoods should be allowed on the market in Canada at the present time due to concerns about public health, the possibility of wider environmental damage, and problems with corporate influence over the regulatory approval process as it currently exists. Moreover, a normative analysis will demonstrate that from the ethical standpoint of utilitarianism, the government is negligent in adopting a Precautionary Principle in terms of the impact of its regulatory policies upon the Canadian public. This is reinforced with respect to the application of deontological ethical theory that requires action to be taken in terms of its moral value, and in accordance with universal laws.
Abstract This paper briefly presents some of the arguments posed for and against the use of geneticallymodified crops. It then discusses Monsanto's ambitious attempt at forcing geneticallymodifiedfoods into the marketplace and the resulting loss of public confidence in geneticallymodifiedfoods. The paper also discusses government policies concerning geneticallymodified 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)."
Abstract This paper looks at how, with every passing year, the environment around the American people is becoming more and more artificial and how one of the greatest examples of this is the creation of geneticallymodifiedfoods. It examines how a few huge companies are trying to convince us that their food is not dangerous to our health and, in some cases, is even healthier than organic food. It attempts to prove how this is not true and how geneticallymodifiedfood is potentially dangerous.
From the Paper "A lot of myths have been created to market the genetically engineered food. One of them is that it will help the American farmers. In reality, biotechnology tries to industrialize agriculture even further, converting agriculture into a branch of industry, and as with other labor saving technologies, by increasing productivity biotechnology tends to reduce prices and set in motion a technology treadmill that forces out of business a significant number of farmers, especially the small ones. Another false myth is that biotechnology will benefit Third World farmers. In reality, biotechnology products will undermine exports from Third World countries even more, especially from small-scale producers."
Abstract This paper explains that the debate over African nations refusing U.S. GM food aid encompasses a much larger scope than the Western debate over GM foods. The author points out that, not only must African nations consider the same human health and environmental implications of GM food as their Western counterparts, but also African countries must negotiate a minefield of political and economic concerns unique to the region. The paper states that the debate surrounding GM foods in Africa must take into consideration some uniquely African problems, including Africa's desperate need to feed its large population and the relative poverty of the African nations.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Background to GeneticallyModifiedFoods and Food Aid
Arguments Supporting GeneticallyModifiedFoods Arguments against GeneticallyModifiedFoods The Pros and Cons of GeneticallyModifiedFood Aid
Conclusion
From the Paper "Later reports noted that Zambia's decision was influenced strongly by the UK-based BMA's fears about the spread of antibiotic resistance genes in FM foods to bacteria, and the potential for GM foods to cause allergies. Supporters of GM foods argue that the Zambia's decision was based on bad advice from the BMA. For example, the South African head of AfricaBio notes, "The American Medical Association backs GM food, as does the Royal Society in Britain, the Third World Academy of Sciences and the Food and Agriculture Organization". "
