« In the mind, not the arm: Will Leitch on the drama of pitching | Main | Robo-debt: Matt Simon on the taxing of robot labor »

05/24/2017

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

stella

GMOs is the nowadays talk

Frank Yue

I agree with how the government’s is pushing GMO into the public because their regulation on the production of GMO are becoming more and more stricter, and as of such, GMO can help make the environment better, people healthier and causes less problems in regard to food poisoning. As of recently, GMO have been a hottest new topic in the United States for quite a bit now, as these chemical engineered food has proven to sometimes be more healthier and durable against pest and weather. However, on the switch side businesses have capitalize on GMO because many of the GMO that the food industry make only last for one season and the seeds that are produced from the plant are infertile, or in other words, these seeds cannot use to regrow new plants. Government-wise, GMO could help reduce the pesticide that farmers have to use each year for their food, help ensure mass production of food for farmers and provide food that are less likely to cause disease or food poisoning. Interesting enough, according to the Genetic Literacy Project, “Thousands of illnesses are linked directly to organic food per year” (Yates), because most of the organic food are unregulated by the government and are more prone to diseases due it’s lack of biological defenses. The people and government often overlook this matter, because the media continuously advertise how organic food has more nutrition and healthier for the human body, when in reality, organic food uses more pesticide to protect against insects. Unlike organic food, GMO are modified to contain higher and a more diverse range of nutrition while being durable and less prone to diseases. Of course, the result of GMO cannot be fully measured because the people are still living in a period where organic food makes up a large part of the market and government just recently began their push for GMO to become a better part of society. Unfortunately, with human comes selfishness, and the agenda of businesses could be unknown, as businesses have been known to have full disregard for the health of the people and the environment. There are many cases where unregulated GMO that are sold by businesses have damaged the environment and caused problems to the human health.

Martin Buuri Kaburia

Public awareness is necessary

Kyla

As a consumer I want my food to be safe but on the flip side I want food that is also better for the environment. I thought it was interesting that "big ag" gives money to political campaigns and that does make me question their intentions. I think that GMOs do have benefits aside from the negatives people talk about. GMOs allow us to create more with less, which in turn, GMOs also help fight against having to use as hard of chemicals that kill insects and hurt the environment. I feel as though we should just do the correct research to be able to make GMOs safe if they really are not safe.

Alyssa Marcley

Personally, I don't think that the issue at hand here with a lack of food and agricultural transparency can be entirely correlated to the health of the consumers as a direct result of eating GMOs. Using consumer outreach programs simply to discuss the health effects of consuming GMO's is still not being entirely transparent regarding the large-scale environmental consequences of producing GM crops. Transparency is vital when it comes to product advertisement not simply because one must understand if their food is safe; but to also understand the impact that the food that one is eating is having on the planet and the rest of humanity.
The claim made by industries that produce GM crops states that the production of GM crops makes it possible to produce large quantities of food with low margins of product loss and waste, but research is showing that for many reasons, the cons of GM crop production heavily outweigh the pros (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov). Doing so often involves monoculturing of these GM crops, irresponsible water consumption, and heavy fertilizers which all can contribute to massive biodiversity losses, not to mention the desertification of farmlands that results from bombarding soil with chemicals and rigorous overharvesting (UCSUSA.org). These issues just scratch the surface of how agribusiness is contributing to many of the environmental disasters seen today.
The consumer, armed now with the knowledge of whether or not the food they're eating is produced as a result of irresponsible environmental practices (referring to the product being labeled as having GMOs), is now able to choose to avoid certain foods on the grounds of their own morality and concern for the health of the planet. It, in my opinion, is a right that every consumer should be given.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)