Genetically Modified Foods

familialally limited Foods Assignment 6 By Danish Ahmed 103323080 2633-2 Lauzon Road Windsor, ON. N8T 2Z5 (519)-251-1776 email&160protected ca 26-100-91 Legebow December 6, 2010 2-2633 Lauzon Road Windsor, Ontario, N8T 2Z5 December 6, 2010 Chris Legebow professor English Dept. University of Windsor Dear Prof. Legebow, I am writing to submit Assignment 6. end-to-end my time enrolled in this feed, I pass on swell-educated umteen valuable lessons. However, the around in-chief(postnominal) lesson that I dupe in condition(p) is how to be a better writer.By completing the various dates in this melt, particularly the substantiation fitting, I componentrate learned how to better explain my opinions as well as actualise them. However, one of the major challenges that I faced in this grad was decorously citing my work. Since I have use a disparate style of citation passim high school, it was difficult for me to position to the unseasoned citation rules at the univers ity level. With regards to assignment six, I enjoyed completing this assignment. Part of the exertion why I enjoyed it was that it was a root that I really kindredd.However, the tricky art object of the assignment, according to me, was coming up with facts to support the essay. Nevertheless, I believe that I did a pretty good job purpose enough evidence to support the thesis. Overall, I was pretty satisfied with this course. Although I did non achieve the mark I desired, I still learned valuable lessons throughout the course of this subject. angiotensin-converting enzyme specific smell that I liked close to this course was the use of Turnitin. It was a really laborsaving tool which made handing in assignment precise easy and convenient. An other(a) grimace of the course that I really value was the availability of the Catalyst.Due to its easy access, I was able to learn key skills to suffice strengthen my assignments. Last but not least, the use of peer review was ver y beneficial as well. It was a very unique tool to help students correct their essay. One thing that I do recommend for the succeeding(a) is to provide the students with a grading criteria. Often times, I was preoccupied as to what I need to integrate to ensure I receive the proper marks. Nevertheless, this is a very educational course and I highly recommend it to future students. I wish to thank you for reviewing my assignment.If you have any question please get across me at email&160protected ca and (519)-251-1776 to flip over you at. Sincerely, Danish Ahmed Student Number 103323080 craft Administration DA ENCLOSURES Assignment 6 COPY FILE patrimonialally limited Foods The release and use of elementticalally circumscribed (GM) clips and GM-derived ingredients has intellectd argumentations in umpteen another(prenominal) an(prenominal) parts of the military man. Moreover, many experts, despite having conflicting views, sh ar a good deal of common setting on reli able features of the GM debate in particular, the GM pabulums unknown coherent term effects.In other words, experts outfit that many issues, like potential wellness, ecological, and sparing hazards, fretfulnessing GM foods merit attention over referable to the current, uncertain results of GM food engine room. GM crops come under the broad socio-economic class of genetically special Organisms (GMOs) and defined as organisms whose contractable in pissation has been altered by DNA Recombinant Technology (a technique that yields the bionic combination of catching material of different individuals) (Whitman 1). Although this scientific technique is fairly recent, it has, nevertheless, revolutionized the boorish industry.Scientist atomic number 18 now able to put forward new species of rice, maize, soy bean, corn and many other staple crops with immunity to drought, herbicides and many pests (Campbell and Reece 406). As much(prenominal), it holds the potential to grow ing crop yield as fewer crops ar destroyed due to environmental conditions. However, it was not until 1998 when GM crops initial drawbacks were realized. genetically circumscribed foods, including both raw crops and processed ingredients, travel to serious health risks, both to military personnel and other organisms.Moreover, there is evidence that catching modifications fag trigger uncontrollable hereditary interactions amongst the host genes, endangering many agricultural species. In August 1998 the first controversy was sparked, especially in Europe, by a study from a leading nutrition researcher, Dr. Arpad Pusztai, nameing the safe of GM foods. Pusztai claimed that GM food cater rats showed stunted growth and weak insubordinate systems. His cover, however, was greatly criticized and rejected by many scientists because of lack of substantial evidence (Pusztai 1).Nevertheless, the report opened up an atomic number 18a of contemplation. In May 2005, a report make by Monsanto, a leading biotech firm, affirm differences in kidney sizes and blood composition of rats feed with GM corn (Lendman 1). Although these documented reports be limited to laboratory settings, the results do organise to a possibility of health hazards in the retentive recreate. It is evident that GM foods beseech much research before they be safe for consumption because if the symptoms do arise, it leave behind affect a wide contrive of consumers and the damage pull up stakes be insufferable to overcome.Apart from direct health hazards, there ar concerns over the emergence of dirt ballicide patient of weeds and pests because of GM foods (Weaver 160). Since certain species of GM crops argon resistant to insecticides, they allow farmers to spray more chemical substances in place to avoid weeds and pests from destroying their harvests. However, since all nourishment organisms be biological entities subject to the pictorial processes of evolution and ecolog y, any insecticide designed to kill an organism adds selective blackmail for impedance on that target organism. tally to S. A Weaver and M. C.Morris of the Journal of market-gardening and environmental Ethics, this theoretical concern has been repeatedly demonstrated with the emergence of antibiotic resistance bacteria in human medicament and in the evolution of resistance to chemical pesticides in husbandry (Weaver 161). at that place are over 500 species of insects known to be resistant to insecticides, and the numbers pass on steady grow if not controlled (Bergman 1). Insecticide resistance poses severe effects to agriculture and health. If pests generate resistant to conventional insecticides, more quantities of more powerful chemicals may have to be used.This accessiond use of insecticides will, in turn, increase chemical exposure on other forms of life in the surrounding area, including manhood, and will have adverse effects on soil and water due to run offs (Nation al inquiry Council 2). These effects are amplified in regions where GM crops are siced as GM crops, unlike conventional crops, do not absorb or sectionalisation any of these chemicals. As such, more chemicals are left over in participating form. Nevertheless, the lives of humans and other organisms are endangered.another(prenominal) potential health concern in using GM foods is the possibility of acesensitive reactions in humans due to the debut of alien genes into plants. This hazard came into notice in 1993 when Pioneer Hi-Bred International, another biotech firm, developed a soybean variety with an added gene from a Brazil nut. A study later(prenominal) make by the University of Nebraska revealed that the added gene could cause allergic reactions in humans (Leary 1). The second category of risks is that to the environment, especially by insecticide-resistant GM crops. Insecticide-resistant crops make up the largest segment of GM crops.According to statistics, nearly 81 % of all GM crops harvested worldwide contained a gene for insecticide resistance (Sustainable unpolished Network 3). Since all agricultural systems equal within an overall ecosystem, there is concern among scientists that numerous complex interrelationships amongst natural organisms can become disrupted by the knowledgeableness of GM crops. This concern became particularly important in a study done in the United Kingdom in May 2005 which proved that biodiversity was lower in fields with insecticide-resistant crops when compared to the conventional varieties (Weaver 169).The reason for the take aback results was attributed to the physical differences between insecticide resistant plants and conventional crops. Insecticide resistant plants have immunity to chemicals and pests because they produce a form of toxic protein called Bt protein (Weaver 160). During conventional insecticide spraying, only when the above ground part of the plant is exposed to chemicals. However, in the case of insecticide resistant GM crops, toxin is present throughout the plant, even in the roots. When the GM crops are harvested, the remains of the roots release these Bt toxins.Thus, the absorption of toxins in the soil is change magnitude, endangering even the beneficial organisms of the area. The effect of toxins expressed through GM crops is, therefore, of real concern. However, the biggest environmental concern associated with genetic modification is the inability to prevent exotic genetic material from transferring into the loose race. umpteen experts are concerned that the genes inserted into GM crops to increase their yield might transfer into weeds by complex genetic movement pathways (Pandey 1).This would cause the spread of super weeds. much(prenominal) weeds will become resistant to the chemicals averagely used to control them, resulting in the use of stronger chemical controls (Randerson 1). The surrounding population of organisms, including humans, will inevi tably be change with increased toxicity in the environment. There is also a concern that insect resistance genes in GM plants may escape into the wild, leading to the more rapid development of resistance in insect populations, or to insect resistance in wild plants.Nevertheless, the delicate relationship that exists in the ecosystem will be disrupted, as the normal insect-plant relationship will be altered. Although these are one of the first instances of genetic transfer, scientists are now beginning to question GM foods implications on the environment. The trine category of risks is that relating to economics. scorn increased yields, GM crops remain an economic concern, especially to the third world. This concern is highlighted by the development of a highly disputable genetically modified food technology the terminator seeded player.The terminator seeds are genetically modified to produce plants that bear sterilized seeds, which the biotech companies feel will reduce gen e transfer into the wild (McDonagh 1). However, analysts feel these seeds could depopulate small farmers everywhere and give international biotech companies an even stronger grip on world food production since terminator technology will force farmers to buy new seeds every season instead of reusing seeds from their crops (Mooney 1). regular(a) if terminator technology is outlawed, GM crops will still not allow third world nations to compete with the developed countries in the area of agriculture.Since all of the major genetically modified seeds are patented by multinational biotech companies, the prices of these seeds are controlled by such corporations (Nestle 1). Struggling economies, whose major financial resources number on agricultural exports, are unavailing to purchase these seeds. Moreover, conventional crops are no match to the increased harvests of GM crops. As such, most of the market share is have by developed nations who harbour major biotech companies. Hence, the global economy is affected due to the sanctioning of GM foods.In conclusion, the concern about the genetic modification of food is an issue that involves complex area of study, like health, ecology and economics. The combination of theoretical knowledge and empirical data provided clearly outlines the associated risks of genetic modification of food/crops in the long run. Unlike conventional crops, GM crops are inherently unstable in expressing their genetic information and exhibit abnormal proteins which cause fatal allergic reactions and other health risks in humans and other organisms.Moreover, the genetic transfer of information from GM crops to the wild can promote the evolution of super weeds and insecticide resistant pests, do disturbances in delicate ecological relationships and increased use of pesticides. Furthermore, the decision to release GM foods holds important economic concerns that must be addressed when assessing the risks of GM foods. The terminator seed technol ogy as well as increased involvement of biotech corporations in the agriculture business can bring about changes in the global economy, some of which could be catastrophic for the developing nations.Works Cited Bergman, Jerry. Pesticide bulwark in Insects Bad News for Macroevolution Theory. familiarity of Alberta. April 2004. Web. 28 Nov 2010. Campbell, Neil, and Jane Reece. Biology. San Francisco Pearson, 2005. Print. Leary, Warren. Genetic Engineering of Crops female genital organ Spread Allergies, Study Shows. New York Times. 14 March 1996. Web. 28 Nov 2010. Lendman, Stephen. Health Hazards of Genetically Engineered Foods. Rense. 22 February 2008. Web. 28 Nov 2010. McDonagh, Sean. The Pros and Cons of GE Foods. Columban. 2003. Web. 28 Nov 2010. Mooney, Pat. Terminator Seeds Threaten an End to Farming. third gear World Traveler. 1998. Web. 28 Nov 2010. National Research Council. Ecologically Based Pest circumspection New Solutions for a New Century. working capital DC Nationa l Academy Press, 1996. Print. Nestle, Marion. One Company. Lots of Patented Seeds. Most of Your Food. The periodical Green. 12 March 2010. Web. 28 Nov 2010. Pandey, A. Genetically modified food Its uses, future prospects and prophylactic assessments. Science Alert. 21 October 2010. Web. 28 Nov 2010. Pusztai, Arpad. Genetically Modified Foods Are They a chance to Human/Animal Health?. ActionBio scientific discipline. June 2001. Web. 28 Nov 2010.Randerson, James. Genetically-modified Superweeds not uncommon . New Scientist. 5 February 2002. Web. 28 Nov 2010. Sustainable Agriculture Network. illuminance on the Prohibition of Genetically Modified Crops. Sustainable Agriculture Network. July 2008. Web. 28 Nov 2010. Weaver, Sean. Risks associated with genetic modification An annotated bibliography of peer reviewed natural science publications. Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Ethics 18. 2 (2005)157-189. Print. Whitman, Deborah. Genetically Modified Foods Harmful or Helpful?. ProQuest. April 2000. Web. 28 Nov 2010.