Genetically modified Organisms (GMOs)

GMOs

Introduction

Genetically modified Organisms (GMOs) have been at the centre of a controversy debate for several decades. Implications arising from the discussions have left individuals from both the medical and scientific fields divided into both sides of the GMOs, as it receives equal love as hate. Most of the concerns that are focal points in the rising debates include; food safety, agricultural technology control, environmental effects, and changes in agriculture. In this paper, I will state and support my position on GMOs as well as evaluate the viewpoints of the opposing view.

I have always held an opposed position to the idea of GMOs for all my life. This is inclusive of adopting GMOs as the primary source of food globally. Different reasons support my view, derived from research studies and critiques. One supporting reason is that genetically modified crops have not undergone critical human trials to prove that they are safe for human consumption (Procon.org., 2019). This happens to be in line with the fact that we are not aware of the long-term effects of their use. Additionally, the absence of impact at the current moment does not guarantee that the same will be observed in the future. Studies conducted by scientists of a similar position have made findings that resistance to antibiotics could be a potential risk of using GMOs.

The genetic makeup of plants is also likely to result in changes to the food supply, as they may introduce toxins or prompt allergic reactions (Procon.org., 2019). Examinations carried out on genetically modified food sources have indicated some unintended effects. They are inclusive of; increased levels of allergenic properties, and allergic reactions that result from the creation of new proteins due to gene insertion. Another supporting reason is that some types of genetically modified crops lead to increased use of pesticides and herbicides, which may have adverse environmental effects (Procon.org., 2019). This reason is in line with my position as high-level usage of pesticides and herbicides affect water sources and pollinating insects. Additionally, weeds have become resistant, affecting a considerable percentage of crop acres globally.

The reduced use of pesticides after the adoption of GMOs is an exciting view from the believing questions. This is an issue of interest as most of the individuals who are pro-GMO argue that the crops reduce disease susceptibility and pest invasions, which in turn reduces pesticide use (Alliance for Science, 2019). Moreover, it has been supported by some findings carried out in areas producing GMO crops. In the question of what I would notice is I believed in the pro-GMO view; it is possible that the genetically modified crops can control climate change. Given that one of the significant factors causing climate change is high carbon levels, GMOs can be adopted to adopt this as they emit less carbon. Based on the answer from the third question, I agree that GMOs could be cheaper. The crops are associated with production in high quantities and are specific per locality. In turn, it cuts down on production and transport costs, reducing crop prices.

According to Gilovich, Griffin & Kahneman (2002), decision making and thinking can lead to errors as a result of cognitive biases. While evaluating the reasons for and against my position, I encountered availability bias. It was due to the existence of information that opposes GMO adoption. Additionally, most of the effects of GMO has not been researched by those who support its use, providing an information gap. Confirmation bias also played a role in the evaluation, as much of the interpretation was based on trying to support my position on the issue of GMO. As a result, I gave more focus on materials that opposed GMO.

In my cultural dynamics, people are opposed to the buying of GMOs in the grocery stores. Additionally, the topics relating to the use of genetically modified crops get a majority of support from the opposing sides (Alliance for Science, 2019). Such a scenario may have influenced the existence of bias in the evaluation. Specifically, confirmation bias may have risen from enculturation as it has shaped my beliefs for the topic. Additionally, the reliance on available facts within my group to draw conclusions might have led the information bias.

In as much as my position on genetically modified crops has not changed, the believing tool provided an opportunity to evaluate the pro-GMO views. From the process, I learned that low emissions from the use of GMOs might be a positive stride towards the reduction of emissions that trigger global warming and climate change. Moreover, I was able to critically evaluate the factors that lead to the GMO products being cheap, something that bis supported by reduced transport and production costs.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the GMO field is an area that still requires increased research to guide on decision making. Based on the findings of this analysis, it is evident that the most significant percentage of information that is available opposes the adoption of GMOs. On the contrary, individuals are also using genetically modified crops due to their low prices and lack of documented effects. Lack of supporting evidence to prove the potential effects of GMO consumption has led to their increased use. Ultimately, evaluating the reasons for supporting or opposing their use is essential in making a decision of their importance.

References

Alliance for Science. (2019). The GMO debate – Alliance for Science. Retrieved 5 August 2019, from https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2018/08/the-gmo-debate/

Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. (2002). Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

ProCon.org. (2019). GMOs – Top 3 Pros and Cons – ProCon.org. Retrieved 5 August 2019, from https://www.procon.org/headline.php?headlineID=005447

Browse more products here

Order Here