In “GMOs: A Solution or a Problem?”, biologist Colin Tudge discusses the regulation of genetically modified organisms with the Journal of International Affairs. Tudge views the increasing implementation of genetically modified organisms as the unfortunate and unnecessary result of capitalistic greed and oligopolistic conquest. Based on Tudge’s research in this field of study, he has found that reports and demonstrations have shown that there is no concrete evidence that GMOs produce more nutritious crops than traditional farming methods. In addition, he utilizes evidence to support small-scale traditional farms in stating, “There are also demonstrations worldwide to show that the best way to produce food for everybody is actually with traditional small mixed farms, which already produce more than 50% of the world’s food.” The statistics and facts used by Tudge advocate for the outright elimination of genetic modification as a method agricultural profits.
Tudge’s argument against GMOs is part of the larger ongoing debate that includes discussion on whether alternative agricultural methods such organic farming
…show more content…
Specifically, Tudge seems to be seeking out support from a more liberal target audience, as can be seen in his attacks against the free global market. For example, he calls out the more conservative, so-called “neoliberal” economic system, which seems to resemble an unchecked, laissez-faire, libertarian economic system, calling it “an endeavor to make as much money as possible in the shortest time possible”. Conversely, Tudge seems to lack factual evidence as to whether or not GMOs are harmful. Bringing these two ideas together, his slightly slanted claims along with his lack of solid statistical evidence tend to cater to the general public rather than a highly academic