GMOs have carried a stigma for a while now because of the growing organic and natural food movements we’re seeing. Even I demonized the GMO label and did not see the bigger picture until further researching the topic. Everyone automatically associates GMOs to something bad and unhealthy but that’s not the case for most. To genetically modify an organism does not equate to ripping its nutrients or benefits away from it, it just makes the organism more fit for survival whether it be from chemicals, insects, or pests. Not only that, but it makes it safer for farmers, specifically third world countries, since they have to spray these chemicals themselves. GM crops have grown popular in the past years as science advances. In her Ted Talk, Jill Farrant, explains how resurrection plants are the future of agriculture and food that will help with water conservation and allow some places with natural hindrances in agriculture (ie. floods). Like mentioned in a previous post below, the world population will go up (inevitably) to to about 9 billion in the next 30 years. Frankly, we would be fine without GMOs but it would be a lot harder. It would also be hard on our environment (loss of land) and global food distribution. Like everything there are negative and positives. In the end what everyone coincided who wrote the sources I used, agreed that the worst thing about GMOs is corporate control (ex. Monsanto).
I agree with you that most people view GMOs as "bad." But they really aren't. Crops and animals are modified to be able to survive better, like you said, but they can also be engineered to produce more nutrients and vitamins. People just need to educate themselves on what GMOs are and why farmers use them. I think more people would be okay with eating GMOs once they learn about them.
ReplyDelete