Technology has grown enough to support human living through agricultural innovations. Application of genetic engineering has developed considerably since the 20th century. In particular, modified crops have created mixed views on their effects to environmental, health and climate. This paper through, the speaker (Michael Pollan) in the video, “Open Source Food and Genetic Engineering” has his views reviewed and evaluated for a critique.
The speaker faults genetically modified food for failing to increase crop yields. Pollan further explains how engineering has allowed farmers to handle more land due to the resilience and resistance exhibited by these plants as the only main advantage. Skepticism is expressed in the efforts to learn more about genetically engineered crops and the environmental and physiological impact they pose. In his opinion, genetically engineered crops are being advocated for, whereas the initial reason for their existence is yet to be attained. Conventional farming practices can also achieve the strides made by the genetically modified crops.
Use of genetic engineering allows for identification of useful genes and their transfer between organisms that are not naturally able to cross breed. Nevertheless, the central point of contention by the speaker is the firm grip on intellectual property practiced by the genetic engineering companies. As a result, the speaker talks of how that limits the freedom to study, understand and improve these crops by freelance scientists. This draconian style of creative control is the leading cause of suspicion that the genetically modified crops have failed to attain the initial desired outcome of increasing plant yields to sustain the ever growing global population.
Personal, professional experiences create a preference for open food sources rather than genetically engineered crops. Not only do open food sources allow for independent study and modification, but it also allows for the general public to understand clearly the merits and demerits of the crops as compared to genetically engineered food (Halford, 2003). Additionally, conventional crop breeding methods ensure that the soil integrity and composition are maintained. Soil integrity is achieved through farm practices such as crop rotation and cross breeding. Nevertheless, though the conventional breeding methods are more natural than genetic engineering methods, they are uncertain and time-consuming while genetic engineering techniques are precise (Halford, 2003). After intense research on the crop(s) of interest, scientists are either able to isolate the undesirable strains or include desirable ones by embedding them to the crops’ genetic makeup. Such practices provide a quicker and more sustainable way of producing crop breeds that are resilient and resistant to varied climatic and environmental conditions.
In conclusion, considering the rapidly increasing global population and diminishing agriculturally viable land, the study of genetically engineered crops could boost universal food security. As elucidated by the speaker, the greatest threat posed to genetic engineering is the limited access to the information surrounding the modification done to the crops. Doing away with the strict creative control currently practiced will allow the introduction of better ideas to flow into the sector. A better understanding of the environmental and biological impact posed by these modified plants will be attained quickly. Sharing of information would ensure the study of crop genetics to further advancement in the field of agriculture. Incorporation of scientists and idealists in open food source engineering will certainly aid larger companies as well as small scale firms to help improve yield.
Work-cited
Halford, N. (2003). Genetically modified crops. London: Imperial College Press.
