High Cost of High Tech Foods
Question 1: The ethical issues in this case revolve around the consumption of genetically modified (GM) foods. On one hand, pro-GM groups argue that potential risks need to be judged once enough scientific research has taken place. Until then these crops should be available because of their high per acre yields and reduced need for pesticides and herbicides. With higher per acre yield counts, crops could be used to help feed the world’s hungry. On the other side of the argument, anti-GM groups do not want wide spread distribution until further long-term studies have been conducted. Anti-GM groups wonder what the effects could be on the environment, how the food chain will be affected, and what the dangers are to wildlife and plants.
Question 2: It is hard to say whether one group is right and one is wrong in this debate. The two sides both have strong arguments and have valid reasoning behind their beliefs. As stated above, the pro-GM groups argue that the food can be grown in large quantities to supply the hungry with food. The anti-GM groups argue that we do not need to rush to disperse experimental foods without more research and testing. Even though the government states that GM crops are similar to non-GM crops and show no risk to the consumer, environmentalist groups think these conclusions are incorrect and there is not enough evidence to support these statements.
Question 3: It would be hard to bridge the gap between the pro-GM and anti-GM groups. The groups could potentially come to a compromise on the amount of research and testing that needed to be done before GM crops could be used for public consumption. The pro-GM groups would not like this as much because they could not get food to those who need it most throughout the world. The anti-GM groups would not like this compromise because they would feel that although there is some research and testing being done, it is not enough for them to feel completely comfortable with
Question 2: It is hard to say whether one group is right and one is wrong in this debate. The two sides both have strong arguments and have valid reasoning behind their beliefs. As stated above, the pro-GM groups argue that the food can be grown in large quantities to supply the hungry with food. The anti-GM groups argue that we do not need to rush to disperse experimental foods without more research and testing. Even though the government states that GM crops are similar to non-GM crops and show no risk to the consumer, environmentalist groups think these conclusions are incorrect and there is not enough evidence to support these statements.
Question 3: It would be hard to bridge the gap between the pro-GM and anti-GM groups. The groups could potentially come to a compromise on the amount of research and testing that needed to be done before GM crops could be used for public consumption. The pro-GM groups would not like this as much because they could not get food to those who need it most throughout the world. The anti-GM groups would not like this compromise because they would feel that although there is some research and testing being done, it is not enough for them to feel completely comfortable with