Genetically Modified Crops Should be Banned

Genetically modified crops have been around since the mid-90s, with the 'flarv savr' tomato. Global agribusiness conglomerates focus their R&D on creating strains of disease and pest resistant seeds. Is this a technological breakthrough that will solve the problem of worldwide hunger? Or is it the beginning of a slippery ethical slope that will inevitably result in a multi-breasted chicken with 10 legs?

Genetically Modified Crops Should be Banned

Yes because... No because...

Genetically modified foods are ethically wrong

Just like stem cell research, cloning and in vitro fertilization, messing with genetics is morally wrong and will result in, ultimately, the destruction of the natural world.
Also of great importance is the fact that Corporations such as Monsanto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto) have patented GM crops which limit the crop’s growth cycle to only one season, leading to farmers having to buy new crop each year. How economical is it for farmers to have to buy seed every season? How does this ‘help the poor and the underdeveloped’?
Surely, when you are the sole supplier of a product ‘these people’ start to become reliant on your company for the ‘tools to feed themselves’, the situation becomes one of slavery, not freedom.
It should be noted that Monsanto has publicly pledged not to commercialise this type of seed, however, ask yourself what sort of people deliberately create such a technology, in order to ‘protect their cash flow’?
For more information on the ‘Terminator’ gene, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#.22Terminator.22_seed_controversy

Genetically modified foods are morally right because they will help the poor and the underdeveloped.
The claim that GM foods are ethically wrong is simply the first world moralizing against the third world. It is not fair that the French, e.g., won’t allow GM foods to be imported from Africa. By giving these people the tools to be able to feed themselves, we are helping to lift them out of poverty.
IVF and stem cell research are not banned.

Genetically Modified Crops Should be Banned

Yes because... No because...

Genetically Modified Food does not benefit people.

Genetically modified foods only benefit the large corporations that sell them. The vegetables are modified to look better and be larger and weather transportation related damage better so that these companies can make more money. They do not add to the taste or freshness of nutrition of the food.

GM foods allow the largest amount of food to be available for the largest amount of people. Food with added nutrition (rice with added vitamin A), freshness (tomatoes) and reduced effort or pesticides (almost all other GM crops) have caused not only an increase in income for the retailers but the farmers, and consumers receive other benefits.

Genetically Modified Crops Should be Banned

Yes because... No because...

Genetically modified foods greatly affect our long term health and well-being.

The hormones and antibiotics given to cows and chickens are found in our bodies and we don't yet know the extent to which these cause chronic disease.

Genetically modified foods have no effect on our well-being.
The fight against genetically modified foods is in the hands of a very small group of rich white collar self-righteous slow-food organics who don't understand the basic economics of food production and consumption. This Statement opposite is false because the FDA approved cloned products like meat and milk for consumption!

Genetically Modified Crops Should be Banned

Yes because... No because...

Genetically modified foods can help solve the food crisis

Unfortunately, the current promotion of GM products is dangerously misleading.
While certain factors such as growing efficiency and productivity are beneficial to growers including small and large scale farmers, the actual benefits to the consumer are minimal. Other issues, for instance, Horizontal Gene Transference (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer), where unstable genes are incorporated into to the receivers make-up (in this case, a human being or animal), are being greatly marginalised.
As stated above the ‘receiver’ of the unstable genes could be any living animal, including a Human. Is it right that we should be introducing genetic changes into the food chain? There is no telling how these changes could affect life on planet Earth.

A lot of poor people around the world are not able to obtain sufficient amounts of food. Genetically modifying food is a scientific solution to increase yield, food production and quality. It improves production by altering the genetic code of organisms to produce food products which have more favourable characteristics such as increased resistance to rotting and pesticides. Efficiency and productivity increase thus lowering prices making more food accessible to the poor.

Debates > Genetically Modified Crops Should be Banned
Category: