Cloey Roper

December 5, 2015
Biology 1010
Professor Winters
Issue Paper: Genetically Modified Organisms
Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are organisms that have been altered using genetic
engineering techniques. Scientist alter the DNA of an organism in order to create a more desirable
outcome. Two examples of this are, creating drought and pesticide resistant plants, and using artificial
selection to create larger animals that develop more quickly in order to feed the growing population of
people. Those for the development and continued use of GMOs argue that this type of technology is safe,
is better for the environment, and may even help to solve world hunger, while those against GMOs argue
that there are too many unknown risks associated with GMOs. People against GMOs point out that the
companies that produce GMOs seem to have a, what you dont know cant hurt you attitude regarding
GMOs, and suggest that GMOs are harmful for consumption and to the environment. People that oppose
using GMOs also point out that those responsible for creating laws regarding the usage of GMOs
(specifically in the United States) have too much personally invested in the practice, and are therefore not
able to present data accurately, and fairly. Throughout this paper I will investigate both sides of the
controversial usage of GMOs in hopes to better understand the issues related to Genetically Modified
Organisms.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association supports using GMOs claiming that, The use of
genetically modified (GM) ingredients is not only safe for people and our planet, but also has a number of
important benefits ("Grocery Manufacturers Association Position on GMOs."). As I mentioned above,
one benefit of GMOs is that we are able to produce more food quickly and we see examples of this in
both the plants and animals that make up our diet. In the publication, Genetically Modified Organisms

(GMOs): Transgenic Crops and Recombinant DNA Technology, Author Theresa Phillips PhD, gives the
example that salmon have been engineered to grow larger and mature faster, and cattle have been
enhanced to exhibit resistance to mad cow disease, and later goes on to say that, advances have also
been made in developing crops that mature faster and tolerate aluminum, boron, salt, drought, frost, and
other environmental stressors, allowing plants to grow in conditions where they might not otherwise
flourish (Phillips, T.). According to the Grocery Manufacturers Association, 70-80% of the foods we
eat in the United States, both at home and away from home, contain ingredients that have been genetically
modified ("The Facts About GMO."). Companies who support GMOs rely on the FDA to regulate food
safety, and claim that science suggest there are not any negative health concerns related to using GMOs.
GMO supporters advocate that the consequences related to GMOs are strictly positive. However, those
fighting the usage of GMOs would argue differently.
How little we actually know about possible side effects regarding the consumption of GMOs is
constantly being brought up among those who stand against GMOs. The website, saynotogmos.org,
explains how using GMOs in our food is dangerous by referencing an outbreak of a new disease in 1989
saying that, in 1989 there was an outbreak of a new disease in the US, contracted by over 5,000 people
and traced back to a batch of L-tryptophan food supplement produced with GM bacteria. Even though it
contained less than 0.1 per cent of a highly toxic compound, 37 people died and 1,500 were left with
permanent disabilities. More may have died, but the American Centre for Disease Control stopped
counting in 1991 ("Say No To GMOs! GM Food: A Guide for the Confused."). Later the site says that,
the US government declared that it was not GM that was at fault but a failure in the purification process.
However, the company concerned, Showa Denko, admitted that the low-level purification process had
been used without ill effect in non-GM batches. Scientists at Showa Denko blame the GM process for
producing traces of a potent new toxin. This new toxin had never been found in non-GM versions of the
product. More recently people have been trying to require companies to label food that contains GMOs.
According to the Non GMO project, polls consistently show that a significant majority of North

Americans would like to be able to tell if the food theyre purchasing contains GMOs (a 2008 CBS News
Poll found that 87% of consumers wanted GMOs labeled) ("GENETICALLY MODIFIED
ORGANISMS."). Despite the high number of people who support labeling GMOs companies still do not
have to label GMO products. If genetically modified organisms are truly safe then why not label them?
Personally I believe in real, natural, whole foods, and I also feel that it is our moral responsibility
to take care of our planet. One major way that we can contribute to a healthier planet (and self for that
matter) is by choosing ethical foods. If we took better care of our planet we wouldnt need to be trying to
grow food in places where it doesnt belong, and if we took better care of one other there would likely be
less people going hungry. I dont feel that our politicians, and CEOs of companys should be able to
decide if GMOs are safe or not, and therefore feel strongly that at the very least food containing GMOs
should be labeled. The fact that GMOs are banned in several countries stands as a reminder to me that
many of those calling the shots in the United States have placed their personal interest before the safety of
the public (according to an article published on The Nation, at least 26 countries as of 2013 have at least
partial if not full bans on GMOs). Perhaps with more time and research my stance on this will change,
but until we have more concrete evidence that GMOs are safe I dont think they should be hiding in our
food. For me the benefits of eating real food, and taking care of our planet far outweigh the benefits that
may or may not be linked to GMOs, and the bottom line is that too little is known about them.
Throughout this paper I have investigated both the pros and the cons associated with genetically
modified organisms. As mentioned above the benefits are that we are able to produce more food, and
therefore feed more people quicker. Animals consume less energy and grow bigger for eating, and plants
are able to sustain in environments where they may otherwise not survive. However, little is known about
the long term consequences both our bodies, and our environment may suffer due to GMOs. We must ask
ourselves, is immediate gratification worth the long term sacrifices we will make by consuming GMOs? I
hope after reading this paper you feel you are more capable of making an educated stance on genetically
modified organisms, and their place in our society.

Works Cited:

"GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS." The NonGMO Project RSS. Web. 5 Dec. 2015.
"Grocery Manufacturers Association Position on GMOs." The Facts About GMO. Web. 5 Dec. 2015.
"Say No To GMOs! GM Food: A Guide for the Confused." Say No To GMOs! - September 2006. 1 Sept.
2006. Web. 5 Dec. 2015.
"The Facts About GMO." The Facts About GMO. Web. 5 Dec. 2015.
"Twenty-Six Countries Ban GMOs-Why Won't the US?" The Nation. 29 Oct. 2013. Web. 5 Dec. 2015.
Phillips, T. (2008) Genetically modified organisms (GMOs): Transgenic crops and recombinant DNA
technology. Nature Education 1(1):213