Summary The genetic modification of food is heavily politicised and there are numerous arguments for and against the practice. AquAdvantage salmon, a genetically modified breed of Atlantic salmon, is an early example of GM livestock.
If these standards are not strong enough for consumers, many regions are introducing labelling laws. Despite increased land scarcity and the population roughly doubling, the Green Revolution ensured that cereal crop production increased three-fold. The first, known as transgenic modification, involves the movement of genetic material from one variety or species of organism to another.
The debate is nothing new, but the prevalence of GMOs has increased over the past 15 years. Wide-spread use of Roundup has caused weeds to develop resistance, creating so-called super weeds.
The Role of Genetically Modified Food There are calls for a second Green Revolution to drive new agricultural research and development programmes. These crops allow farmers to control weeds without harming their crop. By examining the use of GM in plant and livestock agriculture, this paper will consider both sides of the debate.
Biotechnology standardsdeveloped by the World Health Organisation, maintain that all new GM food should be tested on a case by case basis. Frankenfood or Green Revolution? The United States welcomes biotech with open arms. Resistant crops are not without their problems, as eventually the pests and diseases are likely to evolve to overcome the resistance gene.
The vast majority of soybeans, corn, and cotton grown in the United States is genetically modified. While the health effects are uncertain, other problems are easy to find. Many subsistence farmers are yet to adopt mechanised farming practices. The region stands to benefit from the advances made in precision agriculturewhich allow for more targeted use of water and fertiliser.
Prior to the beginning of this process, in the s, there were fears that the world was facing a Malthusian future in which the population would grow faster than the food supply. On its own, GM food is unlikely to make the world food secure. A major argument against GM food maintains that farmers will become overly dependent on a handful of biotechnology companies that could adopt extortionate practices.
Sub-Saharan Africa, for instance, did not experience the same level of agricultural development as other regions, leaving it even further behind. Agricultural research and development programmes are required to lift yields and identify new methods of sustainable farming that can produce more food with fewer inputs.
While they could renege on this commitment and introduce extortionate practices, as they operate in an industry that has clear and significant effects on the public interest they would be foolish to do so. Reducing the amount of food that is lost to pests and disease is the main reason for developing GM food.
This process locks genetically modified organisms GMOs into an ever escalating battle against harmful organisms. And if GM salmon escapes into the wild, it could out-perform native species and cause their extinction. GM products undergo rigorous tests to ascertain their risk to human health and the natural environment prior to being released to the market.
For the most part, these challenges were caused more by the policy environment in which these inputs were used. While sub-Saharan Africa is still able to reap rewards from the first Green Revolution, other parts of the world have reached a barrier.
Private companies now conduct significant biotechnology research, which is often profit motivated. Given that so much of our food contains genetically modified organisms GMOssorting out truth from falsehood is of vital importance.
National food safety authorities should be encouraged to adopt these standards. GM is a broad field and there are many types of GM products available or in various stages of development.
Equally, however, the possibility of unintended or unforeseen problems arising from the technology remains and it would be irresponsible to rush into the widespread production of GM food without first testing the safety of each product.
Some of the reduction in yield growth since the mids is associated with this degradation.
An overreliance on the technology, however, is likely to be self-defeating in the long-term. There is a small chance that antibiotic-resistant genes could transfer to disease-causing bacteria when ingested, which would create super germs.When the green revolution began in the s, it was before the revolution in molecular genetics: IR8, the first miracle rice, was bred without knowledge of the genes that blessed it with high yields.
A new green revolution is in the making. Farmers in India are now using social media to promote and advocate for the use of genetically modified (GM) seeds. The anti-GM lobbyists are shocked by this unexpected demand among. Video: Biochemist Myles Power dresses down Indian anti-GMO philosopher and ‘green revolution’ critic Vandana Shiva Myles Power | August 2, Anti-GMO activists have attacked innovation in agriculture since the start of the Green Revolution in.
Proponents of GMO s are optimistic because a confluence of social, commercial and technological forces is boosting the case for the technology. As India and China grow richer, the world is likely to need much more food, just as arable land, water and energy become scarcer and more expensive.
France’s Failure: GMOs and The Green Revolution By Caitlin Kennedy, 02/06/ A notable piece titled France Fails Science Test was recently published in Cosmos by Marcel Kuntz, John Davison and Agnes E. Ricroch, three plant biologists who wonderfully illustrate how French politics beats scientific reason when it comes to the debate on.
Wild claims are made about the successes of the green revolution (or GMOs), which certainly should not be accepted at face value, and fail to acknowledge the massive external costs of this model.Download