Genetic engineering, friend or foe? Essay

By bringing in this technology to make the selfsame(prenominal) crop that people eat and grow, make it much insulated against some of the elements of nature, to a greater extent nutritious it will improve local production, said Channapatna Prakash, professor in show molecular genetics at Tuskegee University, Alabama. If it does make a difference in their overall health and social welfargon with the least intervention, it needs to be looked at very carefully, he said. If it does provide some solution in certain places and circumstances, then why not? Prakash is also a member of the U. S. Agriculture Departments agricultural biotechnology advisory committee. Genetic modification (GM) involves exchanging or splicing genes of unrelated species that cannot naturally tack with each other and enthusiastic scientists say the applications are almost limitless. The species can be vastly different, for example, inserting scorpion toxin or spider venom genes into maize and other food crops as a natural pesticide to prevent insects and birds from cater on the plants, or fish antifreeze genes into tomatoes.So this is the positive side of the argument, however, others do not feel the same recently trail GM crops deal been destroyed even in sleepy Devon in a trails site at Dartington. Fears were raised even higher because an internationally acclaimed organic farm was nearby. Insect or the wind could have carried genetically modified pollen to other farms thus creating unwanted and unsuspected mutations. Not every one agrees that GM foods will necessarily become the saviour for the worlds hungry and people insist that at that place is, as yet, no conclusive evidence of the benefits of GM.The whole GM issue creates strong emotions, particularly among the more sceptic opponents to the technology who have been known to march across fields and rip up fledged test plants, demanding that governments put a stop to Frankenstein foods by banning the import and the commercial use of GM crops. Apart from their charge that nobody yet knows how safe GM crops are, they also accuse powerful biotechnology multinational companies of using poor countries as a dumping ground for products, which have failed to sell to mercenary but sceptical European markets.Already there are specific examples there are problems with genetically Engineered Soya Bean and Maize Imports. The first main genetically modified food was a tomato paste, introduced with careful consumer consultation, clearly labelled. It sold well until the current furore began. In 1996 the European Union EU veritable the import of US genetically modified Soya bean and maize, staple commodities which go untracked into a large number of processed foods. The US companies refused to label or segregate the new products, more relate with winning markets than public attitudes.Ordinary people ended up eating modified food without learned it, with any tangible benefit to them, and having no real say in the de cisions. This major failure of republic resulted in a huge consumer backlash. It also raised questions of environmental risks of GM crops spreading genes to other species and affirmable loss of biodiversity. As can be seen sharing understanding of the risks and labelling GM tainted or intensify products has not happened automatically there is too much money at stake. However, we should consider these issues carefully. There are risks far more complex than a blanket moratorium would solve.Different crops vary enormously over questions worry gene flow e. g. due to mode of pollination or unrestricted movement of GM animals for breeding or wild relatives, which might become weeds or pests. So a plant like inunct seed rape merits much more careful attention than other less genetically lite species. Talking to ecological scientists, it seems clear that five years of research is not going to give a generic answer to tell us whether GM is safe or not. We know so gnomish about either the ecology or safety of normal foods that we often do not have a yardstick to make meaningful comparison with GM foods.Much better than a rank moratorium is to be precautionary but on a case-by-case basis, rather than assume that everything is equally risky. earlier than swallow whole the current green position on GM foods, we need to recognise that it is dependable as easy to exaggerate risks as it is to ignore them or pretend they arent there. Current EU labelling is only mandatory if you can detect genes or the proteins in the food, but this only addresses a underage minority of the concerns. If someone objects to GM food on ethical or religious grounds or to the effect of the crop on the environment, present labelling misses the point completely.Here is a fundamental injustice, which the Government has through with(p) very little to address. Genetic Engineering, Friend or Foe? Is still a question to be answered the debate will continue, as will the research that pushes t he boundaries of science. The answer lies in the far future build preview only The above preview is unformatted text This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Variation and Inheritance section.