Human Genetics

Student Example 1

Dr. C. Dimos

SCI4060

January 20th, 2012

Critical Thinking Analysis Matrix: Genetically Modified Foods

I. Thesis:

a. Advocates – The thesis of the article in favor of the use of genetically modified foods supports the utilization of both biotechnological advances in farming techniques, and the genetic engineering of crops; whilst providing evidence against the implied health, environmental and socioeconomic concerns of those who are opposed.

b. Opponents – The thesis of the article against the use of biotechnological farming techniques and genetic engineering of crops, and demonstrates the unpredictable nature and potential health implications upon humans, animals and the environment that these crops can induce.

II. Problem/ Question:

a. Advocates- The advocates for the use of genetically modified foods believe that biotechnology and genetically modified foods should be fully embraced within the farming industry. The use of biotechnology can provide crops with beneficial traits that can withstand pests, allow for less utilization of pesticides and allow crops to be grown in conditions within which, without the use of said techniques, would be otherwise impossible. The problem for the advocates lies within their belief that the general public is being taught to fear genetically modified crops and products, due to propaganda used to link them to health and environmental issues.

b. Opponents- The opponents against the use of genetically modified foods believe that these foods are unsafe for human consumption; can cause health and nutritional deficiencies and can also cause substantial issues within the natural environment if these modified organisms were allowed to interact with naturally occurring species, such as allergies within the human population.

c. My Point of View. – It is my belief that whilst the concerns of the opponents are indeed valid; the testing procedures that genetically modified foods are put through before they are even allowed to go to market should lessen the fear against these products. Science has provided us with many of the necessities of life that we utilize today without thinking twice about, and GMO foods that have underwent the appropriate testing procedures should be embraced the same way if they are proven to not cause any harm to human health or the environment.

III. Perspective:

a. Advocates- The perspective of the advocate being a mother and farmer who has researched the topic on her own due to her family owning a farm, directly influences her position as she is able to directly see the benefits that the use of biotechnology and genetically modified foods are able to provide based on her personal experience, such as lessening the use of pesticides. The lack of justifiable evidence related to the harm of these foods, as well as, the advocate believing that farmers have the right to grow whatever they want using newer techniques, also directly influences the advocates position on the issue.

b. Opponents- The opponents being the founder, of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) believes that corporations should not disrupt the natural genetic blueprints of living organisms, as well as should not be able to create a plant and sell them for profit. The opponents are obviously in favor of traditional, natural growing processes that would not be linked to any major corporation whose only concern is to make a profit off of products that can not only harm the environment, but also human health. Together, all of these components directly contribute to the opponent’s position on the topic of genetically modified foods.

c. My Point of View- Whilst I personally do know not much at all about genetically modified foods; I believe that science is a logically based practice and has provided us with tools and techniques such as vaccinations and health care based off of research and testing. If these same methods are utilized whilst determined if GMO foods are safe for human consumption and in regards to the environment, then I see no reason as to why the safety of these foods should be questioned.

IV. Evidence Identification and Evaluation:

a. Advocates- The evidence provided by the advocates include facts related to the history and testing procedures that GMO crops must go through, no evidence of nutritional deficiency, reduction in the use of pesticides, and the debunking of other myths regarding the topic such as cross-contamination of species and seed companies making a profit with their modifications being sold to farmers. The use of facts regarding the testing time of six to twelve years, as well as the cost to ensure that these GMO’s are safe; provides a strong argument in support of the advocate. The fact that numerous government agencies are also involved, backs up the strength of the argument and evidence that the advocate is portraying to the reader. However, aside from the mention of the study done by the National Center for Food and Agriculture Policy, and the examples of corn and pesticide poisonings, the advocate having stated that so many studies are being done, could have provided more up-to-date studies regarding human health and GMO’s, as well as more studies to debunk the myths that they mentioned.

b. Opponents- The evidence provided by the opponents relates to direct examples and studies within which GMO foods have been directly linked such as the study relating to the rats and the potatoes, elevated levels of IGF-1 and cancer, the brazil nut gene and allergies, phytoestrogen content in GMO soybeans and mention that no other country has approved the utilization of rBGH all strengthen the argument of the opponents as well as provide sufficient evidence to support their position. The mention of the genetically engineered brand of L-tryptophan however, while seemingly assisting the argument as well could be used as a null point due to the fact that the chemical was intended to be used as a dietary supplement and not as a normal food product. However, this example of evidence still supports the opponent’s claims as it does show exactly how genetically engineered organisms of any kind can indeed pose a health threat, and in this case, cause deaths.

c. My Point of View- In terms of supporting evidence, I personally feel as if the opponents provided more substantial pieces of evidence in order to support their side. The advocates could have provided more examples of testing done in order to debunk the myths instead of just mentioning a few examples. However, both sides of the argument could have tried to utilize more current studies and testing as it would have shown the current circumstances regarding the argument.

V. Context:

a. Advocates- The current ethical, political and social environments are influencing the advocate’s position majorly based on the socio-economic regards in relation to family owned farms. In order for family based farms to continue to supply their products which make up , biotechnology allows their farming processes to be done easier, improve the nutritional value of food and increase the rate at which food can produced, which is especially needed as the world population continues to grow at an alarming rate. Aside from this, the right of farmers to grow whatever they want to, as well as being able to utilize newer, scientifically proven techniques, also contributes to the influence of their arguments.

b. Opponents- The opponents are vastly being influenced by the current ethical, political and social environment of society. The ethical implications of GMO foods being harmful to human health, as well as the ethics of modifying the genes of organisms on the whole that can produce toxins, are greatly influencing the argument of the opponents. Aside from the ethical health implications, the political nature of companies being able to modify a natural product and sell it for profit, as well as the damage to the environment and the potential to create invasive species than can damage the naturally occurring ecosystem, all contribute to the opponents arguments.

c. My Point of View- It is my belief that the current political, ethical and social environments actually favor both sides equally. In this current age, people are becoming more health conscious and would chose to avoid GMO foods that can potentially lead to deadly health conditions, as well as qualms about scientists “playing God”, greatly supports the opponents. On the other hand, the current rate at which the population is exponentially growing, and a lack of enough food to feed everyone, as well as the potential to produce more nutritionally sound produce supports the advocate. Overall, society in its current organic-health food craze indeed supports the opponent more, but the advocate still has enough support in terms of farmers and the need for greater food production to also be seen as favorable.

VI. Assumptions:

a. Advocates- The advocates assumed that the reader of the article would understand how the process of creating a GMO food or organism is done. The advocate discussed the regulations involving the process, but neglected to make any reference to the process in itself. If the advocate had written even a simple paragraph about the process that is done in a laboratory from a single cell and controlled and monitored, their argument could have been strengthened even more.

b. Opponents- The opponents assumed that the reader of the article would not know about the entire regulation process that is required before a new GMO product can be placed onto the market, as well as the extensive testing that is done in order to ensure the safety of the product. Although the inclusion of this information could have weakened the opponent’s argument, if the reader already knew about these regulations, not including it makes it appear as if the opponent is trying to hide information regarding the testing procedures, making these procedures appear to be safe, and weakening the opponent’s argument.

c. My Point of View- The assumptions of both the advocates and opponents in regards to if the general public would know how GMO foods are created and how they are tested is vastly true. I consider myself to be someone who enjoys reading up on scientific developments, and even I had no idea about the intricacies involving the creation, testing and development of GMO foods until I read both articles and did more additional research on my own.

VII. Conclusions:

a. Advocates-. The implications of the advocate’s conclusions indicate that GMO foods are indeed safe for human consumption and pose no threat to human health or the environment due to the large variety of testing procedures and protocols that are utilized within the development of these products. The advocates also conclude that although biotechnology does indeed have its issues, it is the way of the future and can provide solutions to problems that are currently affecting the world. With proper and continued scientific advancements, GMO foods will be safe for consumption, allow farmers to utilize new techniques and allow for plants and animals to be breed for traits that will only benefit the entire population of earth.

b. Opponents- The implications of the opponents conclusions, indicate that if GMO foods are allowed to be continuously used and not labeled or banned, they will harm not only humans but also the environment, and can damage and harm natural ecosystems as the modified organisms will be able to out-compete natural ones. The opponents also conclude that due to the widespread use of biotechnology process, farming will eventually become a thing of the past and millions of jobs will eventually be lost with the corporations owning the entire world’s food supply. If GMO foods are banned, then farming will continue as it has always been, natural species will thrive, and there will be no harm to the environment, economy or health of the human population.

c. My Point of View- Based on both conclusions, I support the advocate’s conclusion over that of the opponent. Like anything science related, if the proper practices, testing, and maintenance methods are utilized, there will be no way that the health, environmental and economic issue expressed by the opponent can come to pass. Although science is not 100% fool proof and there will be person who experience adverse reactions to GMO foods such as allergies, I believe that GMO foods once properly created, will be beneficial in the long run.