These pigs may be costly to buy due to all the trouble went through to modify it, but it is less expensive for farmers to farm with,because the modified pigs do not need added phytase to their feed anymore. . The major metabolic alterations made to enviropigs compared to the original Yorkshire pigs causes animal welfare concerns. Thus there are a few negative aspects to genetically modifying the Yorkshire pigs, which leads to another, even bigger
However, except for supplying the needs of humanity and making much cheaper food. Factory farming is an unhealthy agricultural practice to both human and the environment. Factory farming contributed to serious pollution problems, the animal treatments are cruel and it has affected the business opportunity of traditional farms and its workers by occupying their markets. Factory Farming is a threat to human health and the environment, therefore the government should take action on it. First of all, it affects human health and the environment.
Both these courses of action lead to ecological imbalances and have severe long-term effects on the environment. On a national level, this cycle affects the country, because reduced coffee production, decreases foreign exchange earnings and export earnings, which also
Even when humans are taken into account first, some of these decisions can actually cause more harm than good. Destroying the Earth is simultaneously destroying humans, because they depend on the environment for survival. Eradicating one species of insects, for example, can have serious unintended effects. These pesticides can kill of pollinating insects as well, which in turn reduces crop outputs. All living things in the natural world depend on one another, just as people depend on one another in human environments.
With any change comes consequences, good and bad. The negative side of our society eating plant based is that more and more heavy pesticides will have to be applied in order to yield enough crop to sustain human populations. With heavy chemicals being used this damages our environment as well. A negative side of creating legal requirements for farms is that there are ways around these rules or loop holes so to speak. I do believe however, that the good outways the bad in this situation.
As such, they do not attract pests, and that eliminates the requirement for the use of pesticides. This can also reduce the risk of infection from viruses, so it could be included in the technical aspect of a solution, discussed above. However, making crops non-target organisms does also present a major environmental cost, one of the controversies surrounding GMOs. As non-target organisms, they do not attract insects., This also applies to insects, which play a vital role in the pollination of
The bad aspects, of course, are the damage to the rest of our food supply, the possible effects on health, the environmental damage that may cause problems and ultimately increase the price of food down the road (for example, climate change restricting areas where crops will be grown; or spreading dead zones making fish and shellfish less available). The other crops, the fruits and vegetables, are still being grown, but in more limited space and in more limited areas, making them in their turn potentially more vulnerable to difficulties with weather and climate change, and even things like mold or insect threats. There will also be a tendency for their farmers to seek more pesticides and fertilizers and modifications of the plants, be they by hybridizing or genetically modifying, in order to grow more in a more limited space, contributing more of the same sorts of environmental damage. Also, of course, these foods have become relatively more expensive. Choosing the cheaper corn-centered foods also causes consumers to miss out on some excellent nutrition and some great foods that can get overlooked when purchasing processed foods.
By marketing certain foods as nutritional holy grails in Western cultures, increased demand is placed on the countries producing these foods, which can damage the physical geography of these areas (Sander & Jacobsen 2014). Local individuals also have a more difficult time consuming these dietary staples on their own terms (Ofstehage 2012). Additionally, in terms of climate change, most “superfoods” are produced out of North America. As such, these foods have to travel farther distances, increasing the amount of pollution in the form of carbon dioxide emissions that are released into the atmosphere (Wheeler & von Braun 2013). Moreover, in terms of food quality, increased demand for “superfoods” can lead to heightened levels of contamination.
Water waste is also a big problem surrounding agriculture due to farmers growing crops that are not suited for the environments that they are being grown in, thus needing to be watered more frequently. GM crops like Golden rice are specifically able to grow in arid climates and will not need to be watered as much as their non-GM counter parts would need to be in the same
This could also bother our health too because we eat lots of veggies out of the field. The pesticide and herbicides cause contaminate bugs and thing and they will spread all over the city. For example, bees carry pollen and things but if the stuff in the field is contaminated then that will do a bad thing to the city. I could go on and on about Gmos being so bad but on the other hand there is people who believe that Gmos are beneficial to humans! They say it makes food taste better and they say it forms fewer animals health problems.
Although the list of advantages for selective breeding is boundless, there are a long list of disadvantages. With mutations comes the risk of new diseases as well as other health affects. Some health affects may skip the plant and affect those around it such as humans or other organisms that consume the plant. Genetically altering a plant can lead to shorter life spans as well as the ruining of the fruits made by the plant. A less extreme but still unsatisfying loss could be a poor tasting crop or one that may decay much faster.
Moreover, deforestation makes the soil weak creating erosion and in the long run, it could affect the agriculture. In addition, when deforestation becomes a situation of consideration, others systems do so. For instance, the water cycle can be affected since trees are responsible of evaporating the water, which then is condensed and then reaches again the trees to complete the cycle. Nonetheless, as many trees have been burned to make different uses of the land, the water cycle cannot be as efficient as it used to be. Therefore, different parts of the world can be affected by deforestation of the Amazon forest.
The fertilizers used to grow cotton can foul the air and pollute water sources such as rivers. Once the rivers are polluted it affects the wildlife and can even lead the fish and other species to death. Cotton production doesn’t drastically decrease wildlife living in the area but it can harm and kill it. Large subsidies in EU and American farmers have made it so that Mali is not receiving a fair price for cotton. Cotton should be helping Malians out of poverty but the subsidies are causing problems.
Monarchs might as well be the most advantageous species on the planet because they help pollinate plants which produces our crops and provides a food source for birds and small reptiles. However, they’re facing some complications thats decreasing the population like habitat loss, climate change, chemical pollutants, poaching/farming, and public awareness. Herbicide are the monarchs biggest threat. People have thought of asking state and local representatives to scale down of unnecessary mowing and herbicide application, promoting agricultural methods that doesn’t kill milkweeds and other plants that pollinators need, and plant milkweeds in areas that aren’t available. The monarch is a milkweed butterfly in the family of Nymphalidae.