This past Easter Sunday I sat down to dinner with my family, like every Easter I can remember. One of my many cousins, this one is only four, said Grace before we ate. Until this weekend I never noticed exactly what he said. One of the modest lines he spoke went like this: “God is good. God is great. He gave us food for us to eat.” He continued on with his prayer, but I contemplated that line for several days.
Recently I had been given the topic to research Genetically Modified Organisms (from now on known as GMO’s), and I had discovered that much of this field contains modifying agricultural practices, or known in agriculture as Genetic Engineering (from now on know as GE).
The United States Government and the FDA have been allowing the use of these scientific practices on agricultural products that livestock and even people consume on a daily basis. GMO’s and GE have a profoundly negative effect on nature’s ecosystems, and could possibly be detrimental to society. The understanding of this topic first must consist from a background in the field of science. GMO is a set scientific practices using technology that alter the genetic makeup of such living organisms as animals, plants, or bacteria. In agriculture GE can be used in several different ways to make a crop that is less susceptible to bugs, more tolerant to weather, and / or healthier for people.
These goals are met through mutating the crops genes, or by giving the crop an additive that will deter the crops predators. “Traditional breeding is limited by the available genetic variability… The great potential… of genetic engineering is that it removes those limits, providing a greater range of possibilities of transferring desired phenotypes into organisms” (Phifer 2088).
The Essay on Genetic Engineering Organism Environment Plant
Many people have been discussing the scientific advancements recently made in genetic engineering. Genetic engineering has the ability to reconstruct an organism's DNA and chromosomes. Some believe that this new scientific ability will better our environment. However, I feel that genetic engineering has the potential to do more negative than positive.By altering an organism's genetic composition, ...
An example of GE is a pollen additive called Bacillus thuringiensis or other wise known as Bt.
This bacterium is excreted by a crop; like corn, potatoes, or soy; and “becomes activated only when absorbed into the highly alkaline digestive system of organisms such as corn root worm” (Tokar 28).
Now the crop is able to produce abundant amounts of its seed (the fruit or vegetable) without the fear of bugs eating them. This helps the plant become an invasive species which is species not native to an area being introduced into an area intentionally or unintentionally. This is one of the top three problems the environment is facing besides loss of habitat and climate change (Phifer 2088).
Now this crop, which is now a GE crop, is placed into an unnatural environment where it is able to wildly reproduce. The trouble with this is that “[a] single gene will have multiple effects, while in other cases several genes need to work together to produce a single effect, along a causal pathway that will be extremely difficult to untangle” (Fukuyama 30).
This is where genetically modifying plants shows it negative effects. This type of modification of an organism can have very adverse effects. “In some cases, high levels of introgression from cultivated or introduced relatives have eliminated genetic diversity and the genetic uniqueness of native species, effectively contributing to their extinction” (Phifer 2088).
These environmental affects are seen in three places: the soil, plants, and animals New studies today are being done by Universities across the world, and the effects of GMO’s, GE’s, and Bt are being put to the test.
Studies have begun from the ground up, so to speak, where critics of GE’s and environmentalist are concerned for the conditions of the soil. Two major problems have occurred from the use of GE crops. One is a “decrease in plant decomposition rates and of carbon and nitrogen levels which could affect soil fertility” (Phifer 2088).
The Term Paper on Biology EEI Effect Of Inorganic And Organic Fertilisers On Yield And Growth Of Tomatoes
ABSTRACT Aim: Laboratory experiments were carried out at Trinity Anglican School, Australia in 2010 to study the effect of various organic and inorganic fertilisers on the growth of tomato plants in the northern tropical region of Queensland, Australia during the winter season of 2010. Five pots with tomato seedlings were prepared for the experiment. Two pots were fertilised with inorganic ...
With out high levels of nitrogen and carbon, crops roots cannot seize the nutrients from the soil. Nitrogen is the building block for plants, and is detrimental for the plant to lack this nutrient.
Bt also has created stronger weeds, and stronger predators. This makes the GE crops virtually normal and the process of GMO’s starts over again with that crop. This creates super bugs and super weeds that the ecosystem is not ready to deal with. The largest field of study is the effects of Bt on non-targeted animals that come into contact with the toxin. One of the largest areas of testing is being done on monarch butterflies.
This research is concerned about the transportation of Bt through the air and on to plant life in the area. Researches placed the Bt pollen on milkweed plants, the monarch butterfly larva’s prime food source, and observed what happened to the larva after they ate the leaves of the Bt leaves and the regular leaves. The studies at Cornell University have showed that “44% of the larvae that were exposed to the Bt pollen died, while both control groups had a 100% survival rate. The surviving Bt-exposed larvae were also reduced in weight by more than 60%” (Tokar 28).
The monarch butterfly is not the only animal that is affected by the Bt pollen. “Rats fed genetically engineered potatoes had significantly smaller intestines, [pancreas], kidneys, livers, lungs, and brains, and enlarged thymus and prostate glands…
[and] depressed immune systems” (Tokar 28).
Although the Bt pollen benefits the organisms that secrete it, there are damaging implications for the animals that intake this pollen. GMO’s and GE’s are under heavy fire from European nations, and European based food companies. The world’s first and third largest food companies, Nestle and Unilever, have ceased the use of GMO’s because of the recent studies. Gerber, who is a subsidiary of the world’s largest biotech company, Novartis, has stopped using GMO’s in there products as well. Baby food has been thought to be all natural and safe for children, so why did it contain GMO’s if the there was no pertinent information on GMO’s safety for adults.
The Essay on Horizontal Gene Transfer Crops Plant Biotechnology
Horizontal Gene Transmission For centuries, humankind has made improvements to crop plants through selective breeding and hybridization, the controlled pollination of plants. Plant technology is an extension of this traditional plant breeding with one important difference, plant biotechnology allows for the transfer of a greater variety of genetic information in a more precise controlled manner. ...
One major social issue is the trouble with business getting in the way with human safety. The main reasons for the concern is the lack of testing done, especially traditional University testing. “[B]biotech companies pour billions of dollars every year into developing and marketing new high-tech crop varieties, researchers concerned about the health and environment consequences of these technologies face scarce research funds, unrealistic burdens of proof, and sometimes even professional ostracism” (Tokar 28).
Brian Tokar says that, in the past two decades, we have known about the ill effects; however, they were slighted as mere science fiction (28).
An example of this business vs. research is seen in the building of the Hoover Dam.
At first it was thought to be a modern marvel, except now the United States government is persuading all nation not to take on a project as large because we “now understand the ecological… consequences that such undertakings produce” (Fukuyama 30).
The American government has in the past rushed into what was believed to be marvels, and now is rushing into this marvel. I was once told the definition on insanity: Repeating the same thing over and over again except expecting different results. This seems to be exactly what our government is doing. This creates a new world trading policy, and a terrible problem for Americans because we can no longer sell these crops to foreign countries.
We now feed our livestock the surplus GMO’s. We do not directly know the effects of GMO’s on plants, so what allows us to see how well our livestock live off it. If the world doesn’t want people eating GE crops then why would they want to eat livestock who consume GE crops. Scientists look at genes to find out what they do; however, once they find the one gene that will release a toxin like Bt, they never think about what other functions that gene might be involved in. Much of these practices have been left to the private sector to decide if the new crop is safe for the environment and people. “Nature – both the natural environment around us and our own – deserves an approach based on respect and stewardship, not domination and mastery” (Fukuyama 2088).
The Essay on Stem Cell Cells Crops Human
Crops that are Genetically Modified to produce drugs could cost the fraction of the price of drugs today, making it easier for all people to afford. In Africa and parts of Asia many people cannot afford basic drugs, therefore die from preventable diseases. GM crops could suppress pain, prevent conception and fight off infection. "'Pharming' [could be] the ultimate solution to many of the worlds ...
This makes me think about what my little cousin said at dinner about God giving us food to eat. We has humans need to look at what we are doing, and see that we cannot play God to the organisms of the earth. Works Cited Fukuyama, Francis. “In defense of nature, human and non-human.” World Watch.
July-August 2002, v 15, i 4 p 30. Phifer, P. R. and L. L. Wolfenbarger.
“Ecological Risks and Benefits of Genetically Engineered Plants.” Science. December 15, 2000. v 290, i 5499 p 2088. Tokar, Brian. “Butterfly Experiment Highlights Biotech Hazards.” Synthesis/Regeneration. Winter 2000, p 28..
