The Pros And Cons Of Genetically Modified Organisms

Genetically-modified Organisms, often abbreviated as GMO’s or GE crops, are defined by the World Health Organization as, “organisms who’s DNA has been altered in a non-natural way”. (Glass, Emily) Through genetic engineering, scientists have aimed to create plants more resistant to disease and allow plants to be directly exposed to herbicide chemicals to ward off predators (with limited supposed health consequences). While the outward intentions of the GMO’s appear to be for the betterment of society, this has not come without significant risk to human health and our environment. GMO’s have been linked to, “toxic and allergic reactions, sick, sterile and dead livestock, and damage to virtually every organ studied in lab animals.” (IRT) Since

Many advocates of GMO’s argue pesticide usage has gone down since a majority of GMO crops have been genetically engineered to supposedly be resistant to chemicals being sprayed directly onto them. In theory, this is supposed to reduce the amount of pesticide to achieve the same result. However, there exist many studies that show that pesticide usage has actually increased since the introduction of GE crops. A study conducted by Washington State University research professor Dr. Charles Benbrook found that “super-weeds”, weeds that have built a resistance to these chemicals have been evolving rapidly since GMO’s commercial availability in 1996. “Resistant weeds have become a major problem for many farmers reliant on GE crops, and are now driving up the volume of herbicide needed each year by

Miguel Altieri, a professor of agroecology at UC Berkeley presents the idea that “unless whole regions are declared GM agriculture free, the development of distinct systems of agriculture (GM and non-GM) will be impossible as GM agriculture emerges at the expense of all other forms of production.” (Altieri 364) His analysis suggest GMO’s are like an invasive species, they can grow and spread out of human’s control. Once genetically-modified versions of seeds are introduced into an unintended area, it would be quite the daunting task to remedy. To respond to the accepted fact of cross-contamination, the European Union allows for a 0.9% limit of non-organic materials found within a harvest to still consider the product “organic”. (Randall, Rebecca). United States, for reference, allows up to 5% contamination to still be considered organic by the USDA. (Laufer, Peter) If a body as large as the EU has made “exceptions” for foods to be considered organic, it surely reflects growing concerns going all the way down the line to the local farmer. In Australia, farmer Steve Marsh sued a neighbor for compensation after GMO canola seeds contaminated his otherwise organic canola farm. (Natural Society). In Canada, agricultural biotech giant Monsanto, manufactures of GMO and related herbicide products, sued a farmer for patent infringement when pollen from a farm miles away had contaminated his