Genetically engineered foods are produced through genetic modification of crops. Under this technological advancement, some of the foods that the world has acquired include Flavr Savr Tomato from California in 1994. Currently, genetic modification has received massive expansion in almost every food production. The gene products that are developed can then be fed to animals and the product thus affects the dairy products and the meat (Harris, 2004).
Scientists and economists have a positive motive when they campaign and advocate for genetically engineered foods. To begin with, the global population is on the increase. There is a massive third world hunger and the World Health Organization estimates that the in every 2 seconds, a child dies due to starvation. In addition, under and mal-nourishment are still lingering concerns in the world. This technology promises to offer solution to most of these concerns. These plants are able to survive harsh conditions (Lang & Hallman, 2005). For instance, they are pest resistant; tolerate herbicide, high levels of disease resistance, cold and drought resistant. In addition, they have nutritious benefits and the technology that has been used in some extent to develop edible vaccines that can be obtained from potatoes and tomatoes.
A mention of genetically engineered foods results to a massive debate. In most cases the debates are misleading and have inadequate information on the issue. The genetically modified foods are developed through thorough scientific methods including tests on the effects. With the demand in food constantly rising, genetically modified foods are more helpful although there is need to control their production and consumption for the sake of the environment and human health. Genetically engineered foods offer hope for the world’s future; malnutrition included. Demand for food demonstrates no sign of taking the downward curve.
Problems
While these foods have massive benefits, there is a lingering controversy. Farmers, biotechnology companies, governmental regulators, consumers, scientists and non-government organizations at times engage in conflicts over the safety of the food to these foods. Some activists and writers are always eager, keen and rather opportunistic to use such controversies to attain publicity, sell newspapers or at times ensure that their perceptions and believes gather followers. Due to this, there are situations that the public may be fed with entirely wrong information about the genetically engineered foods. Discussed below are some of the possible side effects of genetically engineered foods.
With genetically engineered foods, there are two kinds of risks that exist. The first is environmental hazards. In this, there have been reports of unintended harm some organisms. An example is the death of butterfly caterpillars due to pollen from B.t Corn. This report was included in almost every news article in attempts by activists to convince the world that there was absolutely no hope in genetically engineered foods. Reports also have it that there are chances of genes being transferred to non-target species. Further still, there are chances that the effectiveness of pesticides is bound to reduce (Harris, 2004). From the environmental hazards, there are also risks on human health. The first effect of this food can be allergen responses by the body. This can be accredited by the fact that many children develop allergic responses to peanuts. Therefore, when a new food product is introduced, the possibility of this to happen will be magnified. The second risk on human health is generally a worry that people have. Some scientists hold the view that introduction of these foods may have negative and otherwise unexpected outcomes on human health. This worry stems from a study that involved genetically modified potatoes that caused differences in the intestines of rats used in an experiment according to Lancet. With such, there is therefore great need to ensure that there are no loose ends left in this practice. There is a different scenario on the internet and the streets where many people have made baseless ‘stories’ that aim to communicate that the rising cardio-vascular diseases and cancer have come along as a result of the genetically engineered foods. Looking at such articles, there is no point at which they have availed reliable evidence on the case.
Arguments on genetically engineered foods have claimed that food derived through genetically modification pose a much greater risk than conventional food (Pollan, 2006). However, it is rather surprising to observe that there are actually no reports that have presented on the ill effects due to consumption of this food products. This leaves it clear therefore that the food is safe just as the other food only that this requires a well organized regulatory structure. However, this is different from some of the articles in the internet and others in print that communicate entirely wrong information on genetically modified foods.
For instance, in The Omnivore’s Dilemma, the writer makes it appear as if the scientists did little research before developing genetically engineered foods. Nutrition science to be precise gets a bad rap. What the writer successfully accomplishes is that he uses his ability to transform agricultural practices and policies to what is rather moral philosophy (Pollan, 2006). He spends little time to consider the hours that scientists spend in the laboratory to benefit human safety. When one refers to social media over the same topic, many hold the view that genetically modified foods are being banned from some countries for they can cause cancer amongst other chronic diseases. These facts are misleading and entirely wrong. They are perceptions people have while they spend little time to refer to scientific evidence. In essence, it is notable that they cite documents where they have read about when they talk about. It is notable that they are selective in paying emphasis on the possible negative effects of the genetically modified foods while pay little attention to benefits. Journalists and writers have the potential to sway the entire world through a pen and a paper. If they are going to do the same with genetically modified foods, they have the responsibility to use facts and scientific evidence.
Solutions
Despite the fact that genetically modified foods have demonstrated that they have less risks unlike what the media has continually reported, there is the need to ensure that the loose ends are considered and actions taken towards them. Under this, the hazards to the environment and to human health should be paid attention to. It is equally important to gather all details on genetically engineered foods to ensure that any happening or outcome relating to the same is predictable; the probability of it happening without the awareness of the Scientists would be tragic. Populations cannot be convinced if some scientists still have doubts.
For further control actions, environmental laws, health and safety laws should be amended providing for efficient, effective and cautious application of technology on the production and consumption of genetically engineered foods. Agreements such as the Cartagena Protocol on Bio-safety, International Plant Protection Convention and the Convention on Biological Diversity should be included in both national and international laws. With such a structure in place, risk and uncertainty will be managed. Such agreements have proved essential over time as they analyze methodologies of GMO production in statistics, evaluates the individual components constituted in the production of genetically engineered foods for instance the inserted DNA, vector and donor organism, consider the final result in its totality, (traits of the organism with new characteristics, characteristics of the intended receiving environment and intended use) and they finally consider, analyze and evaluate information generated from both private and public research institutes an also the international agencies (Lang & Hallman, 2005).
The human mind is very delicate when it is illiterate or semi-illiterate. It is therefore essential that populations should not be allowed to stay with little or absolutely no information regarding genetically engineered foods. When the citizens are not educated on the topic, they will grab and believe the entire news they get on the media and perceive it as the entire truth. Activists and anti-GMO individuals will be opportunistic enough to communicate to individuals that genetically engineered foods have been the main cause of the increased cases of cancer. They might lack the evidence to support it but the innocent mind will most probably request for no evidence for they are exposed to minimal knowledge on the issue.
The bottom line is, the populations should be educated on the true benefits and the real hazards out there that will without a doubt develop due to the production and consumption of genetically engineered foods. It is the responsibility of the individuals to seek information about the topic and why the debate is so hot (Fedoroff & Brown, 2004). The government, non-governmental organizations, farmers, biotechnologists and the entire stake holders in genetically engineered food have a mandate to feed the human race with the correct, truthful and up-to-date information on the topic. Let the population know that there are possible risks to the environment, remember to add that the technology is still viable and still gives hope of a hunger free tomorrow even with the increasing population.
For instance, back in February 2013, there was a tsunami of massive stories that were spreading under the Monsanto Protection Act. Basically, it contained a minute provision contained in a large agricultural spending bill. When President Obama signed this in to law, writers were up with their pen spreading the word that this was actually the most dangerous food act ever in the United States and was also termed as being a terrible piece of policy. Some progressed further to claim that the president had signed it in a dark night. It was shocking enough to later understand that the provision had actually been drafted one year ago and had been circulating for nine months in Washington. In essence therefore, no one, let alone the hyper-vigilant campaigners against GMO were caught unaware. This is an example of the serious propagandas that will mislead people’s reasoning and judgments on genetically engineered foods.
Call for Action
It is with unreasonable doubt that the public perception regarding the genetically modified foods and the scientific side of view seems to be distant. There is need to establish a baseline to make this differing views to table their views to demonstrate that genetically modified foods are more helpful in the end. The government, farmers, scientists and economists should step up and shape what the people think. There should be a structure that responds to the articles in the media that seem to report that genetically engineered foods are strategically produced to cause harm to human life. Let the scientists bombard the media as well with facts that demonstrate the practical and tests that they have conducted in their endeavor to ensure that the production and consumption of genetically modified foods can be an effective and long term answer to the world’s demand of food. Under this, the scientists should seek support that is bound to enable them pass information that they gather to the public such that, the people are advised by facts.
The writers, critics, journalists and analysts should step up on their mandate to realize that they have a duty to the public. With this in mind, they should ensure that they are fare and bias free when they talk and discuss genetically engineered foods. They should engage scientific reports and facts. With this, the public will have access to the correct and efficient information on genetically modified foods. However this world has offered freedom to humans, therefore, such critics will always be present. As a result, the responsible parties such as the government should be on the frontline educating its people on what is true and that which are not. While there is still the need to let the people understand that genetically engineered foods are not as dangerous as most people claim, there is need to minimize or probably eliminate the possible human health and environmental hazards. Scientists need to invest and research further to ensure that there will be more positive discussions on the genetically engineered foods project.
References
Fedoroff, N. V., & Brown, N. M. (2004). Mendel in the kitchen: a scientist's view of genetically modified foods. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press
Harris, N. (2004). Genetically engineered foods. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press.
Lang, J. T., & Hallman, W. K. (2005). Who Does The Public Trust? The Case of Genetically Modified Food in the United States. Risk Analysis, 25(5), 1241-1252.
Pollan, M. (2006). The omnivore's dilemma: a natural history of four meals. New York: Penguin Press.
