In William Saletan’s “Unhealthy Fixation”, the truth about GMOs is discussed and explored. In his argument, Saletan effectively uses pathos, ethos, and logos to prove his beliefs regarding the labeling, applications, and safety of GMO’s. To help accomplish this, he writes on the incredible potential of GMOs (logos), speaks to their safety, and tells how GMOs can, and have, saved countless lives in third world countries (pathos), additionally, discusses the research he has put into this work (ethos). Saletan successfully uses logos in his piece by telling of the incredible benefits of GMOs. In his work, we read that “the USDA’s catalog of recently engineered plants shows plenty of worthwhile GMO options… (Including) drought-tolerant corn, virus-resistant plums, non-browning apples, potatoes with fewer natural toxins, and soybeans that produce less saturated fat.” Additionally, Saletan states that “scientists are at work on more ambitious ideas, such as high calcium carrots, antioxidant tomatoes, non-allergenic nuts, bacteria resistant oranges, water conserving wheat, …show more content…
He notes that this Project shows just one of the many incredible, potential applications of GMOs. If third world countries planted golden rice, there would be a significantly decreased rate of death in countries afflicted with vitamin A deficiency. However, golden rice is unfortunately no longer available due to the actions of Anti-GMO groups. Anti-GMO groups have inadvertently caused the blindness and/or deaths of many due to their actions against golden rice. By continuing to oppose GMOs, there can be, and has been, disastrous consequences. GMOs improve the general quality of life for many people; they decrease the rate of death and they provide people with what they need. Yet, society is still restricting the creation and use of GMOs. In his essay, Saletan showed that opposition to GMOs leads to many issues and complications, both big and
In the spirit of full disclosure, I have to reveal that my family and all of my neighbors are row-crop farmers, and we raise both GMO corn and GMO soybeans. It is our attitude that we are stewards of the land and of our animals and we would not do anything to either one like Katherine Paul describes. So, I still agree with Caplan that we should be using GMOs to produce food such as Golden Rice that could save billions of people from going blind or
In “The Threats from Genetically Modified Foods”, Robin Mather effectively brings awareness to the harmful side effects of genetically modified foods. She shares genetically modified foods are foods with an altered genetic make-up and therefore, is banned in several countries. Also, the pesticides used in genetically modified foods yield harmful side effects to animals and humans. On top of health hazards, the process of labeling these foods are not as costly as the Federal Drug Administration declares. Furthermore, she discredits the FDA’s credibility by revealing the bovine growth hormone (produced in cow’s pituitary glands and is a genetic modification) raises the risk of cancer; although, the FDA approves it.
It’s a popular topic on the media that GMOs are bad for the human body. Well, little did the they know that ninety percent of corn grown in the US is genetically modified (Margie Kelly), and the body can 't even distinguish between GMOs and non-GMOs! There are people debating that GMOs are unhealthy, bad for the economy and even the environment. These people must be uneducated on this topic. Genetically modified crops improve our society because they allow farmers to yield a larger crop, improve the quality their crop, and lessen the negative environmental impacts of their crops.
To end the controversy associated with GMOs, it is necessary to educate our general public about the positive research associated with GMOs and the many positive benefits. Walt Disney once said, “if you can dream it, you can do it. ”I dream of a day when we will be able to feed the world all while consumers are understanding what is going into their bodies. In order to do so we must start with our youth, and places like Disney World are a great way to fulfill that dream. It is time for us to “Live with the
In the essay “Green monster” who do you believe is his intended audience and why? In “The Green Monster,” James McWilliams informs the reader about GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms) and the affects it has on animals, plants, farmers and our food. Through multiple illustrations of the affects of GMO, he contends that GMO has various potential consequences, which may in fact be more positive than detrimental to food sustainability. His intended audience seems to be food consumers but more specifically, those uninterested in or wary of products which are genetically modified.
“Today in the United States, by the simple acts of feeding ourselves, we are unwittingly participating in the largest experiment ever conducted on human beings.” Jeremy Seifert certainly knows how to get viewers’ attention, as exemplified by the film blurb describing his 2013 documentary, GMO OMG. The frightening depiction of the food industry is one of many efforts to expose consumers of the twenty-first century to the powerful organizations that profit from national ignorance and lack of critical inquiry and involvement. Seifert effectively harnesses the elements of rhetoric throughout his phenomenal argument against remaining complacent about the food industry’s act of withholding of information about genetically modified organisms from
Unfortunately, not everyone was please with the company 's creation. Stakeholders had several different views regarding the genetically modified seeds. Following will be a discussion of the ethical aspects and repercussions from the point of view of three different
For years, the health and safety of genetically modified foods have been debated and researched by scientists, but the question still stands: should genetically modified foods be allowed for consumption? The process of genetic modification involves inserting a gene from bacteria or a virus into an organism where it would normally not be found. The purpose is to alter the genetic code in plants and animals to make them more productive or resistant to pests or farming techniques. Genetically modified organisms, more commonly known as GMOs, have been a controversial topic of debate for a number of reasons. The ethics behind genetically modified foods come into question due to an abundance of short and long-term effects from the process, many of which are still unknown today.
What do a tomato, soybean and a french fry have in common? They are all some of the most commonly genetically modified foods sold on the market today. By using the genetic information from one organism, and inserting or modifying it into another organism, scientists can make food crops stay fresher, grow bigger, and have the crops create their own pesticides. Nevertheless, the technology to modify genes has surpassed its practicality. Genetically modified foods need to be removed from everyday agriculture because of the threat they pose to human health, the environment, and the impact on global economy.
Both essays share common themes, in mainly advocating for sustainability in the food and agriculture industry. However, the authors suggest different methods to obtain this. Can GMOs Be Sustainable, written by McKay Jenkins mainly discusses the usage of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in the agriculture industry, and the controversy that surrounds them. The article is mainly through the point of view of farmer Jenny Schmidt, who discusses the positive effects of GMOs, and how they can help farmers. However, there are also perspectives given by different professionals, which all support the conversation of sustainability in the food industry.
Not only is it cheaper to grow GMO’s, but larger yields can be produced resulting in a billion dollar industry. Hawthorne’s belief that scientists dangerously attempt to attain perfection is clearly
The proposed goal of GMOs is to increase food production. This will supposedly in turn lower food costs, and make it easier to distribute food to feed poor populations around the world. However research shows that global food production has increased enough to, “feed 10 billion people”, one and a half times more than what we need to feed every single person on Earth (The Huffington Post). And yet with this charming initiative having been accomplished, there are still groups of people going hungry everyday. This is not to say that companies like Monsanto are to blame for leaving people hungry or in poverty, but it questions if their goals are based on true concern.
However, nowadays, further studies and inventions created GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms), “where genes from the DNA of one species are extracted and artificially forced into the genes of an unrelated plant or animal” (“Seeds of Deception”). Kara Posso, an environmental science junior, expressively identified some of the benefits of GMO by claiming that “GMO foods, if put to use, could turn out to be more sustainable by allowing us to feed a lot of people. It would also mean using fewer pesticides, which are damaging to water resources” (“Nobel Laureate Praises Benefits of GMOs - The Daily Texan”). The effects of GMO will be
After learning about Monsanto’s past involvement in the dumping of harmful PCBs, a myriad of ethical concerns arise when examining Monsanto’s genetically modified soybeans. A serious issue is whether or not genetically modified crops (GMCs) are safe for human consumption; thus, making it unclear if GMCs are good or bad. This is especially frightening when considering that the FDA is supposed to require changes in food products to “[meet] the criteria of reasonable certainty of no harm, but when you genetically engineer a food which can cause untold differences in that plant, they don’t require anything.” (Robin, 2008, (3)) As a result, Monsanto’s soybeans were allowed on the market despite inadequate testing and served as a complement the “Round Up” herbicide.
GMOS Introduction: I believe that GMOS are good for this world and for the people because the gmos can save us from starving when all the food is gone. GMOS are a genetically modified organism is an organism whose genetic materials that have been altered using genetic engineering techniques. GMO foods are okay to eat because some food that have gmos could have some genetic characteristics in them to make the food survive the hot when that food has to be frozen. GMOS are different from foods that don 't have GMOS Body 1: GMOS can save the world because if we had no food because if there was a drought and the plants died. Then we could just plant GMO foods, The drought won’t really do anything to the plant.