pros of gmos
Nick Scott
Period 4
4/6/14
Pros of GMO’s
Ever since genetically modified organisms (organisms with altered genes to promote a certain desirable trait; GMO for short) have been introduced to the market, large uproars of consumers, politicians, and activists against GMO’s have questioned the necessity and safety of them. But for what? Public and environmental safety has always been a major concern for them, yet, after continuous testing by the FDA, USDA, and EPA, these hypothetical problems have been proven to be just that, hypothetical. Another question presented by these anti-GMO activists is, “What’s in it for me.” To refute all these claims, genetically modified foods are, in fact, healthier for the environment than non-GMO’s, pose no real risk to human health, and are extremely necessary for developing countries with a lacking food supply. Contrary to popular belief, genetically modified foods are far better for the environment than non-GMO’s. Because the altered crop can have its own built-in pesticide, such as corn, the pesticide use has been reduced by 14%, approximately 224 million kilograms. Another benefit of the altered genes means that there is a drastic reduction of runoff of pesticides, herbicide, or chemicals into the surrounding environment. Overall, genetically modified organisms have also reduced greenhouse emissions comparable to removing around four million cars from the road today. Lastly GMO’s reduce the total footprint of agriculture as they can be planted on smaller plots of land with less water consumption (another advantage of modified genes which increases draught resistance) and higher yields of crops than an area many times larger. Another reason why there is so much skepticism by consumers is their “health risk.” It has been shown that only a small portion of people are truly against GMO’s, yet mass media exaggerates hypothetical risks to the public which may not have anything to do with the genetically
Period 4
4/6/14
Pros of GMO’s
Ever since genetically modified organisms (organisms with altered genes to promote a certain desirable trait; GMO for short) have been introduced to the market, large uproars of consumers, politicians, and activists against GMO’s have questioned the necessity and safety of them. But for what? Public and environmental safety has always been a major concern for them, yet, after continuous testing by the FDA, USDA, and EPA, these hypothetical problems have been proven to be just that, hypothetical. Another question presented by these anti-GMO activists is, “What’s in it for me.” To refute all these claims, genetically modified foods are, in fact, healthier for the environment than non-GMO’s, pose no real risk to human health, and are extremely necessary for developing countries with a lacking food supply. Contrary to popular belief, genetically modified foods are far better for the environment than non-GMO’s. Because the altered crop can have its own built-in pesticide, such as corn, the pesticide use has been reduced by 14%, approximately 224 million kilograms. Another benefit of the altered genes means that there is a drastic reduction of runoff of pesticides, herbicide, or chemicals into the surrounding environment. Overall, genetically modified organisms have also reduced greenhouse emissions comparable to removing around four million cars from the road today. Lastly GMO’s reduce the total footprint of agriculture as they can be planted on smaller plots of land with less water consumption (another advantage of modified genes which increases draught resistance) and higher yields of crops than an area many times larger. Another reason why there is so much skepticism by consumers is their “health risk.” It has been shown that only a small portion of people are truly against GMO’s, yet mass media exaggerates hypothetical risks to the public which may not have anything to do with the genetically