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



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


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


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.

Joseph Smith

I do not think that it is the responsibility of the FDA to promote various food technologies to the general public. It should up to other groups( the Department of Agriculture or private groups)to promote these things. The ability of the consumer to judge for themselves what is healthy is important, however the lack of information that the average consumer uses needs to be expanded.

Robert Robison

The thought of the FDA having to allocate some taxpayer dollars in order to educate American consumers is a no brainer in my opinion. The harsh reality is that by the year 2050 we are expected to have nine billion people on this earth, and the ability to feed those people will not come by way of organic harvesting. GMO's produced by companies like Monsanto and Syngenta aid farmers in producing higher crop yields then ever before. The education of the American people in order to ensure they are aware of not only the benefits; but the need for these GMO's, will be extremely influential in the ability of American Agriculturalists in order to aid in the fight against world hunger.

Therese Minaya

With the United State’s overall diet being heavily dominated by genetically modified foods, it is essential that information regarding health concerns of GMO foods are addressed. Although the government needs funding from such bipartisan agreements, it is unethical to receive funding based on campaigns that do not align with American ideals. Constituting a bipartisan agreement based on the reason that GMOs are healthy for Americans is fabricating not only the reputation of the American government, but spreading false information to the American public. A GMO, or Genetically Modified Organism, is any animal or plant whose DNA has been altered for consumption of it by humans. By supporting this type of ordeal that champions the consumption of genetically modified organisms will influence the average american to believe GMOs are healthy, (however they are not), will lead to the overconsumption of the scientifically manipulated food. In doing so, the American government influences people to eat unhealthy foods, essentially infiltrating humans to believe what they are consuming are healthy. Such an instance creates a problem, because consuming GMOs affect the overall health of humans by altering homeostatic chemical levels within the body. This problem puppeteered by the American government not only concerns the health of Americans, but the credibility and reliability of higher American authority. Those in higher power have received their position in office, because the American people place trust in them to effectively help lead the country. However, given that such people promote food sources that are not healthy for humans, such trust becomes put into question. In addition, seeing that biotechnology is detrimental to human flourishing rather than beneficial, it is necessary that those in Government offices begin supporting or even funding agreements that benefit the people in which they govern, rather than harm them. Furthermore, I believe the communication between the government and American citizens must strengthen if higher authority intends to protect their citizens.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

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

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.


Post a comment

Your Information

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

About They Say / I Blog

  • New readings posted monthly, on the same issues that are covered in “They Say / I Say” with Readings—and with a space where readers can comment, and join the conversation.

Follow us on Twitter to get updates about new posts and more! @NortonWrite

Become a Fan