12 arguments - Should we grow GM crops?
1. If you answered Yes the first time:
What if you knew that detractors fear that GM foods might pose health risks for certain people?
- possibility exists that those genetically modifying food crops may unintentionally introduce a new allergen- the possibility that bacteria in our guts could pick up antibiotic-resistance genes found in many GM foodstuffs - exacerbate the already worrisome spread of disease-causing bacteria that have proven able to withstand our antibiotics.
2. If you answered No the first time:
What if you knew that proponents assert that GM foods will promise many health benefits?
- stimulate our bodies to generate vitamin A --> vitamin-A deficiency kills two million children each year, and another 500,000 become permanently blind.
- low-calorie sugar beets and oils with lower saturated fat content; high-fiber corn and high-starch potatoes).
- they will be safer to eat - GM corn has lower fungal toxin content than non-GM corn, and farmers typically produce GM crops using fewer pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers.
3. If you answered Yes the second time:
What if you knew that many feel GM crop technology will hurt small farmers?
- Many small farmers in the developing world maintain a rich diversity of flora; in India alone, farmers raise some 50,000 plant varieties.
- These plants thrive under different climatic and environmental conditions, providing insurance against drought or disease or locust swarms.
4. If you answered No the second time:
What if you knew that GM patrons insist that farmers will reap great benefits from biotechnology?
- farmers only need to use a single weed killer rather than multiple kinds, and they may have to make only a single application rather than several.
- To reduce losses from sudden frosts, which can kill young plants, geneticists have experimented with putting an antifreeze gene into tomato plants.
- To help crops cope with disease, researchers are trying to genetically confer disease resistance to food plants.
- And to help farmers in an increasingly land-hungry world sow crops on marginal land
5. If you answered Yes the third time:
What if you knew that opponents fear that GM crops could harm the environment?
- raising GM crops is an uncontrolled experiment with unknown consequences for surrounding ecosystems. Remember, they admonish, the ravages of the now-banned pesticide DDT. Or PCBs. Or dioxin. Or leaded gas.
- Naysayers also worry that viruses will snatch resistance traits from GM crops bearing genes from crop viruses. These gene-thieving viruses might then evolve into entirely new strains that could infect a whole range of plants previously unaffected
6. If you answered No the third time:
What if you knew that advocates maintain that GM technology will help the environment?
- amounts of cotton genetically modified to withstand pests sprayed 21 percent less insecticide -- that is, they sprayed one to two times rather than eight to ten.
- create buffer zones of conventional crops around GM fields to give harmful insects something to feed on, reducing the selection pressure to adapt to the anti-pest plant.
- Buffer zones would also deter cross-pollination and provide a refuge for harmless and beneficial insects.
7. If you answered Yes the fourth time:
What if you knew that many people feel genetically modifying organisms goes against Nature?
- fiddling with the genetic makeup of plants and animals is unnatural.
- Nature takes millions of years to effect genetic change
- Nature also does not mix apples and oranges, much less flounder and strawberries.
8. If you answered No the fourth time:
What if you knew that scientists submit that genetically modifying plants is completely natural?
- Modern GM methods are simply more precise, scientists stress. Whereas traditional plant breeding involves thousands of shared genes every time two plants are crossed, GM technology allows, if desired, for the exchange of a single gene between plants. GM procedures are also much faster.
9. If you answered Yes the fifth time:
What if you knew that many critics inveigh against biotech companies for being profit-driven, with little concern for potential risks to people or nature?
- to secure patents and reap profits, critics contend, big biotech firms are deliberately over-promoting the benefits of GM technology and underestimating possible health, socioeconomic, and environmental hazards.
10. If you answered No the fifth time:
What if you knew that companies that fashion GM seeds maintain that GM crops hold the greatest hope for adequately feeding our rapidly expanding world population?
- The best way to ensure it's paid for is through intellectual property protection. Patents should operate worldwide, they maintain, because markets are increasingly global in nature.
- The result of this innovation will be GM crops that will offer our best chance to adequately address the challenge of feeding the estimated six billion people who, in as few as 50 years by some estimates, will join the six billion of us already here.
- GM crop farming holds out greater promise than conventional farming of boosting production on the same amount of ground, adherents say, and of raising crops where none could grow before
11. If you answered Yes the sixth time:
What if you knew that many critics assert that GM foods suffer from dangerously poor oversight and regulation?
- Anti-GM food activists have leveled much of their ire at the United States, which produces the bulk of the world's GM foods. (In 1998, American farmers raised 74 percent of all GM crops.)
- Biotech firms, detractors maintain, have been developing and deploying GM crops too quickly and too broadly, without adequate testing or public debate.
12. If you answered No the sixth time:
What if you knew that GM seed companies maintain that GM crops are the most thoroughly tested and highly regulated food plants out there?
What if you knew that detractors fear that GM foods might pose health risks for certain people?
- possibility exists that those genetically modifying food crops may unintentionally introduce a new allergen- the possibility that bacteria in our guts could pick up antibiotic-resistance genes found in many GM foodstuffs - exacerbate the already worrisome spread of disease-causing bacteria that have proven able to withstand our antibiotics.
2. If you answered No the first time:
What if you knew that proponents assert that GM foods will promise many health benefits?
- stimulate our bodies to generate vitamin A --> vitamin-A deficiency kills two million children each year, and another 500,000 become permanently blind.
- low-calorie sugar beets and oils with lower saturated fat content; high-fiber corn and high-starch potatoes).
- they will be safer to eat - GM corn has lower fungal toxin content than non-GM corn, and farmers typically produce GM crops using fewer pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers.
3. If you answered Yes the second time:
What if you knew that many feel GM crop technology will hurt small farmers?
- Many small farmers in the developing world maintain a rich diversity of flora; in India alone, farmers raise some 50,000 plant varieties.
- These plants thrive under different climatic and environmental conditions, providing insurance against drought or disease or locust swarms.
4. If you answered No the second time:
What if you knew that GM patrons insist that farmers will reap great benefits from biotechnology?
- farmers only need to use a single weed killer rather than multiple kinds, and they may have to make only a single application rather than several.
- To reduce losses from sudden frosts, which can kill young plants, geneticists have experimented with putting an antifreeze gene into tomato plants.
- To help crops cope with disease, researchers are trying to genetically confer disease resistance to food plants.
- And to help farmers in an increasingly land-hungry world sow crops on marginal land
5. If you answered Yes the third time:
What if you knew that opponents fear that GM crops could harm the environment?
- raising GM crops is an uncontrolled experiment with unknown consequences for surrounding ecosystems. Remember, they admonish, the ravages of the now-banned pesticide DDT. Or PCBs. Or dioxin. Or leaded gas.
- Naysayers also worry that viruses will snatch resistance traits from GM crops bearing genes from crop viruses. These gene-thieving viruses might then evolve into entirely new strains that could infect a whole range of plants previously unaffected
6. If you answered No the third time:
What if you knew that advocates maintain that GM technology will help the environment?
- amounts of cotton genetically modified to withstand pests sprayed 21 percent less insecticide -- that is, they sprayed one to two times rather than eight to ten.
- create buffer zones of conventional crops around GM fields to give harmful insects something to feed on, reducing the selection pressure to adapt to the anti-pest plant.
- Buffer zones would also deter cross-pollination and provide a refuge for harmless and beneficial insects.
7. If you answered Yes the fourth time:
What if you knew that many people feel genetically modifying organisms goes against Nature?
- fiddling with the genetic makeup of plants and animals is unnatural.
- Nature takes millions of years to effect genetic change
- Nature also does not mix apples and oranges, much less flounder and strawberries.
8. If you answered No the fourth time:
What if you knew that scientists submit that genetically modifying plants is completely natural?
- Modern GM methods are simply more precise, scientists stress. Whereas traditional plant breeding involves thousands of shared genes every time two plants are crossed, GM technology allows, if desired, for the exchange of a single gene between plants. GM procedures are also much faster.
9. If you answered Yes the fifth time:
What if you knew that many critics inveigh against biotech companies for being profit-driven, with little concern for potential risks to people or nature?
- to secure patents and reap profits, critics contend, big biotech firms are deliberately over-promoting the benefits of GM technology and underestimating possible health, socioeconomic, and environmental hazards.
10. If you answered No the fifth time:
What if you knew that companies that fashion GM seeds maintain that GM crops hold the greatest hope for adequately feeding our rapidly expanding world population?
- The best way to ensure it's paid for is through intellectual property protection. Patents should operate worldwide, they maintain, because markets are increasingly global in nature.
- The result of this innovation will be GM crops that will offer our best chance to adequately address the challenge of feeding the estimated six billion people who, in as few as 50 years by some estimates, will join the six billion of us already here.
- GM crop farming holds out greater promise than conventional farming of boosting production on the same amount of ground, adherents say, and of raising crops where none could grow before
11. If you answered Yes the sixth time:
What if you knew that many critics assert that GM foods suffer from dangerously poor oversight and regulation?
- Anti-GM food activists have leveled much of their ire at the United States, which produces the bulk of the world's GM foods. (In 1998, American farmers raised 74 percent of all GM crops.)
- Biotech firms, detractors maintain, have been developing and deploying GM crops too quickly and too broadly, without adequate testing or public debate.
12. If you answered No the sixth time:
What if you knew that GM seed companies maintain that GM crops are the most thoroughly tested and highly regulated food plants out there?
- Industry scientists start by comparing a GM plant with conventionally bred plants of the same variety. Their goal is to see whether an introduced gene alters the GM plant's chemical makeup and nutritional value. If the protein made from the new gene is the only discernible difference between the two plants, scientists test that protein for toxicity by feeding it to animals in amounts thousands of times higher than a person would ever eat. Scientists also test for allergy-inducing potential by checking the chemistry of each new protein against those of about 500 known allergens.