Do you ever think to yourself about the many things we consume each day and where they come from? Or “is this the freshest product I could be putting into my body”? Often, the things we consume each day have a negative impact on our bodies. This partly is due to the quality of the product, but also the fact that 70 percent of our nation’s food being contaminated with a variety of substances. These substances are genetically modified foods and they have increased in the world of agriculture greatly within the past decade. When shopping at a grocery store, the package may say that it is “fresh” and coming straight from the local farms, but all foods and labels cannot be completely trusted. These scientifically engineered products are hitting the market after going through a long life of altercation, including meat, poultry, and plant crops. Uprising about these modified foods has begun across the nation and even the world. People are beginning to second guess what they are putting into their bodies and are looking for the truth of whether these “more improved foods” are beneficial. Genetically modified foods are the holders of mass amounts of risks to the consumers eating these foods, such as allergic reactions from crops as well as the biases in the FDA and slim amounts of research done on these modified products. In connection to labeling, foreign countries have been made to place mandatory labels on foods that have been engineered while lawmakers in the US are slow to join in. Advocates for GMO’s claim that these foods can help eliminate hunger throughout the world and potentially contain more nutrients than a genetically modified free crop. After much research, it is accepted that these genetically modified foods are harmful to the consumers due to the uncertainties of what is inside of the product. The ultimate goal of this essay is for readers will better understand and follow the demand for the labeling and the removal of these genetically modified foods from our stores.
Genetically modified foods have become increasingly popular amongst farmers and with the increase in production has led to the overwhelming amount of risks in these foods. These following paragraphs help downplay to popularity of GM foods, and the risks that come with it. “Approximately 85% of corn is GM followed by 88% of cotton and 91% of soybeans all of which are now present to 75 to 80% of conventional processed foods in the United States,” this quote by author Francis Dizon, in the journal Genetically Modified Foods and Ethical Eating (1). His statement helps raise awareness of the increasing worry of genetically modified foods and what they can be doing to their consumers. Genetically modified foods are becoming dominant in our economy across the world, all foods consumed in the US are 70% GMOs (Cho 1). The increasing popularity of genetically modified food has been followed by the increase in concern of these foods, ranging from the worries of allergies to consumers of genetically modified foods, all the way to what these modifications can do to the plants, soil, and weeds. According to a website linked to a medical research source talking about a growing affair of genetically modified foods, “Studies have shown that the consumption of GMO foods increase the risks of food-based allergies in people” (“Pros and Cons of Genetically” …1).
In addition to the scare of allergies toward genetically modified foods, critics have been hinting at the very slim amount of research preformed on these foods. The previous website article talks about a series of startling information concerning the research of these modified ingredients “from allergic reactions to potential intestinal damage, many people wish to avoid GMO foods because of animal studies that have shown changes in internal cell structure, abnormal tumor growth, and unexpected deaths that have occurred” (“Pros and Cons of Genetically” …1). This explains the large number of symptoms animals being researched being genetically modified. Consumers could understand that these possible complications of genetically modified foods could put them at risk at any time when consuming these products. Advocates for genetically modified foods claim that in the use of these products they will be able to help decrease the amount of starvation on earth. As a counterargument to this claim, on the website Pros and Cons of Genetically Modified Foods, discusses “world produces 17% more food than it needs to be produced to provide each current human with three squares per day,” and though this quote raises the question of why food is being over produced and wasted in some areas, it cannot be sent to those who are in need (“Pros and Cons of Genetically Modified… 1). Many can say that the large monopolistic viewpoints following genetically modified foods over produce, thus overly ship goods to those who are in less of a need of the products even when there is higher demand elsewhere (Pearlstein).
In addition, to the rising concerns of genetically modified foods, there are outstanding arguments as to why these engineered foods are detrimental to the consumer’s wellbeing. Aside from the risks of what the actual product could do to the consumer, there are also risks in genetically modified foods and what they can potentially do to the environment and the chain of agriculture. In the journal, Mandatory Labelling of Genetically Modified Foods, by Zinatul Zainol etal., the damage of what these modifications are doing to the soil is discussed. “It is also feared that herbicide-resistant transgenic plants could cross-breed with weeds and make them equally herbicide-resistant giving rise to ‘super weeds’” (Zinatul Zainol 202). GMO farmers are trying to prevent their plants from being killed by weeds using herbicides, and they have the potential to cross-breed, therefore, making the weeds in that area unaffected, which causes the once helpful task of adding herbicide to help these GM products to turn against its original purpose.
Genetically modified foods have increased the concern of the consumers of these foods. They fear that these foods contain an extended number of problems for both the environment and those who eat these products. In the book, Genetically Modified Foods and Global Welfare, author Ian Sheldon talks about the people’s viewpoints of these foods and their other nutritional options when purchasing these engineered foods. “The data reveals that consumers, worldwide, are averse to GM foods and are often willing to pay to have non-GM rather than GM food. Indeed, 82% of the studies reported positive WTP premiums for non-GM food” (Sheldon 245). They surveyed a large number of people and took their opinions on the risks of genetically modified foods and whether people would consider paying more to eat GMO-Free foods. With Americans being open to the negatives of these genetically modified foods, writers like Melissa Diane Smith, talk about different ways to avoid eating these foods in the journal 7 Ways To Eat Out GMO-Free. “When in doubt, choose dishes that emphasize fresh veggies as much as possible. Currently, all vegetables— except for yellow squash, alfalfa sprouts, and corn—are not genetically modified” (Melissa Diane Smith 1). Diane Smith also implores consumers to look for restaurants that are labeled “non-GMO” or “farm-to-table” because these foods place an emphasis on grass-fed meats and organic produce. Establishments that have those labels make it a lot easier to find dishes that are free of genetically modified foods.
As the genetically modified foods were introduced more and more into grocery stores, an increase in controversy came along with these once favored foods. As time progressed, it took the United States a little longer to realize that these foods are harming their consumers. In addition, friends of the US once being introduced to these foods quickly began to oppose them. In the website article The Intensifying Debate over Genetically Modified Foods, author Renee Choo begins by talking about the viewpoints of other countries on these foods, “sixty-four other countries around the world do require GMOs to be labeled, including the European Union, Japan, Russia, China, Australia, New Zealand, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, and South Korea” (Cho 1). That just being the beginning list of the many countries requiring labels on their foods, countries have even gone as far as to totally eliminate the growing process in their countries, “The European Union has also banned the growing of GM crops” (Cho 1). The European Union is greatly different to those of other countries in the world in the respect that the people in these areas have built a reputation for using fresher products. Authors Howard Ling, and Joseph Lakatos, in their journal article California Proposition Thirty-Seven: Implications for Genetically Modified Food Labeling Policy, explain how processors of foods in European countries have cut back and almost completely avoid using genetically modified foods due to the high risk of developing ailments such as increased allergic problems and potentially cancer, and the large unpopularity of these products (Ling 1). The mandatory labeling of these genetically modified foods in stores, has unintentionally caused a large disappearance of GM foods (Ling 1). These controversies of risks in genetically modified foods has caused consumers to avoid it all together, which directly results in the processors to discontinuing the use of them.
In the European Union or even Asian countries, a large emphasis is placed on the types of products they consume, which is a sound reason as to why people should oppose genetically modified foods. However, in the eyes of many other cultures, the modifications of these crops are seen very differently. In the journal article First Things First: Application of Islamic Principles of Priority in the Ethical Assessment of Genetically Modified Foods, authors Isa Noor and Saadan Man explain the beliefs of Islamic people through their morals and religion, “They prohibit all actions that may lead to environmental destruction and unsustainable use of natural resources” (Noor 1). This explains how Islamic people are told to not change or destruct the environment in their religion (Noor 1). The authors then comment on a religious belief in their culture, saying that “they are allowed to harness nature for their benefit” and that “there is no damage inflicted upon it and subsequently upon themselves and the future generations. Causing any kind of damage is prohibited in Islam” (Noor 1). They may use the environment for their benefit, but they may not inflict any damage upon it because it is banned by the religion. This shows the clashing of both religion and the modification of foods. The author of the book The Philosophy of Food, David Kaplan, along with several colleagues graduating from a variation of prestigious universities talk about his opinion of genetically modified foods and God; “to Engage in Agricultural Biotech is to play God… I personally hesitate to think humans can “perfect” nature” (Kaplan 127). Viewpoints from countries outside of the US prove that genetically modified foods are harmful to both the consumers and the environment. With increased labeling laws in foreign countries putting GM food companies out of grocery stores, it can do the same in the us.
Hundreds of countries outside of the US are now realizing the effects of what these genetically modified foods will do to their consumers, causing them to create laws to label these in their super markets. Thus, creating these labeling laws in foreign countries has caused the majority of GM foods to be placed out of the stores all together. Rising concerns with the affair over the ethicalness of genetically modified foods has turned critics into outrage to make mandatory labeling laws for our country as well. In a website article by the Food and Drug Administration about the laws of genetically modified foods and labeling, they said, “however, if a food derived from a genetically engineered plant is materially different from its traditional counterpart, the labeling of that food must disclose such differences” (U.S. FDA). This has become one of the largest, most beneficial laws aimed towards the labeling of genetically modified foods in the US. The important, upper-level jobs in the FDA are held by people who support the use of GMOs and/or previously worked for the large corporations practicing the uses of GM crops, which is a problem for those attempting to eradicate of label GM foods in stores (Pearlstein). This creates a bias for the decision-making process to make these foods labeled in stores in the US. In support of that statement, the FDA administration has made many statements claiming that there is no meaningful difference in both the original and GM product to make it a requirement for it to be labeled (U.S. FDA). In one success towards labeling foods in the US, the Vermont House bill H-112 was passed overwhelmingly by the senate in the state of Vermont (Fahy 1). This bill, requested by the citizens in Vermont, was passed, requiring that all genetically modified foods in Vermont be labelled in markets. Consumers have the right to know what they are consuming as food, especially with the uprising uncertainties of health with these GM foods, and when it comes to some consumers with specific religious or ethical beliefs (Zainol 202). According to the previously used journal article by Howard Ling, the mandatory use of labels on genetically modified foods will cause a large change in interstate commerce and the business of production. He claims that either all states should be for the mandatory laws of labeling or it cannot be passed. Critics of genetically modified foods are increasingly becoming worried to the problems contained in these foods. Mandatory labeling needs to be placed on all GMO products in grocery stores.
Genetically modified food is claimed to have benefits to help feed those in need and help create larger products for the consumers even though these unorthodox manipulations are causing risk to those who are eating these products. Word of increased allergic reactions, internal problems, and agricultural downfalls to the soil and neighboring farmers are rising; as a result the public is, “Faced with extraordinary risk, uncertainty, and/or gross ignorance about future consequences, we can stay the course and attend later to harmful outcomes in the cases where they occur, or we can try to get ahead of the game by taking precautions before the potential for harm has been established” (Sheldon 339). This quote is a call to action, saying that these consequences of consuming these foods are evident, and there must be a stop to these manipulations as soon as possible. Genetically modified foods are negative to humans due to the many large risks of these products as well as the surrounding viewpoints of countries around the world against GMOs, and lastly the extremely important requirements of labeling on genetically modified foods. It is greatly important to make a change of these foods. Consumers must require for these foods to be labeled by their government officials, as well as they should avoid consuming and purchasing these foods. Purchasing these foods will indorse these companies, while choosing healthier, more natural choices that will put them out of business.