Developments in genetic engineering have led both to doubts and hopeful expectations. The first experiments with genes and their successful results were a kind of magic. They gave promises to enhance agricultural and food production industries, increase yields, eliminate hunger on the earth, and make the life of developing countries easier. However, along with showers of applause there were protests of those who saw in genetic engineering a threat to natural variability of products as well as to people’s health.
Agricultural and food production industries emphasize various positive effects of genetic modification of products. Among these advantages there is a significant reduction in production cost that will eventually lead to a lower price for consumers, which is essential for those who live in poor countries. Besides, as counterargument to those who protest against GM food, proponents of genetic engineering point out beneficial qualities which some products may acquire due to modifications of genes. For example, Keith R. Schneider et al. claim that some type of genetically modified rice, so-called “Golden Rice”, can produce beta-carotene which a human organism further transforms into vitamin A (Scheider et al.). The researchers say that this quality of the rice is very important since there are countries where rice is a primary food product and at the same time these countries’ population suffers from vitamin A deficiency. Thus, the new variety of rice can improve those people’s health and their quality of life.
On the other hand, there are health concerns, too, which worry some researchers of the issue. The greatest one is “the potential for GM foods to cause allergic reactions” (Scheider et al.). When new genes from allergic products are included into non-allergic ones, the modified products may become allergic, too. Without knowing about the modifications, people vulnerable to allergy may eat the product and get an allergic reaction. Therefore, in order to avoid these threats, each producer of a GM product must obligatory “present scientific evidence that they have not incorporated any allergenic substance into their product” (Scheider et al.). If they do not have such evidence, they must put some notice on the product’s package to warn consumers. Then the risk can be eliminated.
So, it is obvious that the issue of genetically modified products is not an easy one and there are both pros and cons concerning it. However, considering the benefits which genetic engineering can give to people in poor countries, the genetic developments should not be completely banned due to some adverse effects found. Instead, more precautions should be taken and more thorough regulations should be introduced.
Works Cited
Schneider, Keith R., Schneider, Renée Goodrich, and Susanna Richardson. “Genetically Modified Food.” UF/IFAS Extension Jan. 2002. Web. 13 March 2016.
