Genetically Modified Food - Coursework Example

Genetically Modified Food Genetic engineering refers to the process of artificial altering and transfer of genes from one organism to another. Genes, which contain Deoxyribonucleic Acid, have instructions that coordinate protein production by cells, which then form the basis for the functionality of the cell. With the advancement in technology and genetic engineering, it is possible to combine genetic material from different breeds, a previously impossible experiment. Subsequently, genetic engineers may take genes from a given species, like a flounder, and transfer them to another species, like a tomato, thus, creating a tomato with characteristics of a fish species. Since the invention of the technology in 1980s and progressing into the past decade, many companies have embraced the use of genetic modification to insert genes into crop species, including important foods, such as soybeans and corn (Hollingsworth 16). This paper seeks to present arguments against the production of genetically modified food in relation to the issues of global economy, as well as environmental, health, and safety concerns. After the invention, genetically modified food has started being marketed in convenience stores and supermarkets in Australia and other parts of the world, has been incorporated into processed foods, such as drink mixes, taco shells and infant formulas. Nonetheless, these foods do not have proper labeling, thus, consumers do not identify genetically modified food when they are eating this kind of product. The technology has its benefits, which include making the crops grow bigger, stay fresher for a long time, and create their own defense against pests. The larger portions of genetically modified crops focus on providing defense against harmful insects or survive exposure to potentially harmful herbicides. Indeed, 71% of the acreage with genetically modified crops was herbicide tolerant in 2008 and 2009, with the remaining acreage designated for crops designed to tolerate herbicides and kill insects (McCullum 1312). Only a small portion of genetically modified crops accounted for resistance to viral infection. In essence, genetically modified pest-resistant crops are toxic to insects. For instance, genetic engineers may modify the corn to exterminate the European corn borer. Strategically, the engineers may integrate genetic material from bacillus thuringiensis, a soil bacterium, to the genetic code of the corn. Naturally, the bacterium produces protein toxic to some insects, and farmers spray their crops using the bacterium at times. In the genetically modified corn, however, each cell produces the toxin, thus making the plant pest-resistant. Despite these seemingly beneficial impacts of genetically modified foods, their harmful effects far outweigh their merits to the society (Lusk and Sullivan 34). Gene modification has surpassed its practicality as it poses a serious threat to the environment, human health, and the global economy. Genetically modified foods may potentially introduce new allergens into foods that did not previously contain them. For instance, a soybean modified with genes from a brazil nut to increase the levels of nutrients was found to introduce allergic reactions to the blood serums of individual with nut allergies. It goes without saying how nut allergies can be serious and fatal to the wellbeing of individuals. Similarly, the FLAVR SAVR tomato, genetically modified, contains the FLAVR SAVR allergen. Nonetheless, the tomato is tastier, larger, and remains fresh for longer than other ordinary tomatoes. However, the product poses health risks to humans (McCullum 1313). In particular, people with seafood allergies may suffer significant consequences from consuming the tomatoes. Moreover, the trout genes present in the tomato may be hazardous for human consumption. Unfortunately, the genetic modification technology is still under development, thus determining the negative effect of such foods to the human body is difficult. Another incident concerning the negative effects of genetically modified foods is the 1989 case of supplement L-Tryptophan. Apparently, the manufacturer sought to alter the manufacturing process to increase production speed without evaluating the toxic side effect. This caused a fatal illness called Eosinophilia Myolgia Syndrome that killed 37 people and permanently disable another 1500 (Lusk and Sullivan 35). Consequently, the supplement was scrapped off from the market after widespread reports of the illness among consumers. Other instances of harmful illnesses resulting from genetically modified foods include the glyphosate, closely associated with the non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and glufosinate, which causes birth defects in mammalian species. These are just a few examples that demonstrate how genetic engineers consider the public as their guinea pigs to experiment genetically modified food. The transfer of genes from species to another creates superbugs. Pesticide-resistant genes may potentially transfer from an organism to a disease-creating bacterium, thus creating a pesticide-resistant bug. This is particularly possible to viruses and bacteria with symbiotic relationships. In other words, gene modification indirectly makes life resistant to diseases, thus forcing these viruses and bacteria to adapt to new forms and create new disorders (Marks, Kalaitzandonakes, & Zakharova 8). Additionally, these crops may make traditional biological pest sprays outmoded as pests may develop resistance to pesticides due to the widespread acreage of genetically modified crops. Unfortunately, there are no superbug antibiotics of pesticides, which may be a serious health risk. The genetic engineering of food may negatively affect the biodiversity of an area in two major ways. First, the genetically modified crops may replace the weed population because the crop has the potential to spread beyond the confines of the field and perhaps interact with other natural weeds. Since the former is stronger genetically, it may slowly transform wild weeds into genetically modified weeds. However, the genetically modified crops are resistant to herbicides and pesticides, thus they may opt to invade the wild grassland. Consequently, this will present unfair competition and destroy the diversity. Second, the regulations for growing genetically modified crops affect the crop varieties and biodiversity. Some producers force farmers to use patented seeds (McCullum 1314). On the other hand, using traditional seeds may be financial disadvantageous to farmers as their competitors produce better looking and better tasting products from genetically modified crops. The potential effect of these modified food forced the European community to impose strict regulations concerning the sale of the products in their consumer markets. Indeed, the European parliament, independent stores, and individual European countries restrict entry and retail of these foods into their market. The regulations require manufacturers to label all their food products that contain any genetically altered material (Carter and Gruère 3). This encompasses all foods with intentionally modified molecule structure, foods with genetically manufactured organisms, and foods isolated from algae, fungi, and microorganisms. Moreover, genetically modified food must not provide misleading information to consumers, pose any danger to the health of the consumer, or vary from the food intended to replace such that the replacement is nutritionally disadvantageous to the consumer. These strict regulations impose trade barriers for food imports into Europe. As earlier mentioned, some retailers do not stock genetically modified food, which results to competitive disadvantage for “half-genetically modified” suppliers (Carter and Gruère 4). Moreover, the regulations are pressurizing some manufacturers and countries that cannot meet the legal requirements, thus obliging them to lose market shares and segments. Regardless of the method used to integrate foreign genes into a cell, it works in some instances, thus genetic engineers have to identify these cells. The common identification strategy is attaching an antibiotic resistant gene to the gene intended for insertion. After the integration attempt, the genetic engineer may treat the numerous cells with an antibiotic. The only cells that survive are those that incorporated the new genes because they become resistant to antibiotics. From the surviving cells, the engineer creates a new food crop. However, all the cells of the crop have the newly introduced genes, including the antibiotic resistant gene. Once available in the food chain, the genetic material of the bacteria living in the animal or human digestive system may take up these genes. Indeed, a previous research show evidence that that the bacteria in the mouth of humans can take up antibiotic resistant genes from genetically modified foods. Currently, the world faces a threat from the resistance of disease-causing bacteria to antibiotics from the excessive use of antibiotic in agriculture (Brownand Ping 210). Introducing antibiotic resistant genes into the human food chain may further deteriorate the already profound health problem. The main factor to consider in the discussion of whether production of genetically modified food should continue is human health. This is evident from the few fatal illnesses and viruses discovered to originate from the technology. Moreover, the potential of the introduction of new diseases and viruses though the use of genetically modified food, but the larger population is ignorant on this fact. Furthermore, there is a high possibility of biodiversity destruction due to the potential transfer of genes from one species to another, which results to creation of powerful crops with the capability of overcoming the natural population of grasslands and weeds. Moreover, planting of the modified crops stipulates that farmers must grow a single variety of the crop species. This automatically wipes out the species diversity in farms. The risks involved with the further production of genetically modified food are very high (Marks, Kalaitzandonakes, & Zakharova 9). The immediate halt of production of these modified foods from biotechnological and agricultural industries will be beneficial to the environment, the global economy, and human health. Works Cited Brown, Janine, and Ping, Yen. “Consumer Perception of Risk Associated with Eating Genetically Engineered Soybeans Is Less in the Presence of a Perceived Consumer Benefit.” Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 103, 208-214. Print. Carter, Colin, and Gruère, Guillaume. “International Approaches to Labeling Genetically Modified Food.” Choices, 2003 (2), 1-4. Print. Hollingsworth, Patrick. “Organic Foods Back in the Spotlight.” Food Technology, 2003, 57, 16. Print. Lusk, Jayson, and Sullivan, L. “Consumer Acceptance of Genetically Modified Foods.” Food Technology, 2002, 56(10), 32-37. Print. Marks, Leonie, Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas, and Zakharova, Lucy. “Will Biotech Foods Finish the Ride?” Choices, 2002, 6-10. Print. McCullum, Charles. “Food Biotechnology in the New Millennium: Promises, Realities, and Challenges.” Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 2001, 100, 1311-1315. Print. Read More