FOOD GM IS DANGEROUS?
How you think is food modified genetically healthy? For many years sentences are divided in this topic. One think that it doesn't affect our health and other causes cancer. The truth as ever most probably lies between. Other question whether we know when we have appears food modified? For her what merits and demerits are? Whether could we live out this food?

Advantages of genetically engineered foods

GM crops are more productive and have a larger yield.

Offer more nutritional value and better flavor.

A possibility that they could eliminate allergy-causing properties in some foods.

Inbuilt resistance to pests, weeds and disease.

More capable of thriving in regions with poor soil or adverse climates.

More environment friendly as they require less herbicides and pesticides.

Foods are more resistent and stay ripe for longer so they can be shipped long distances or kept on shop shelves for longer periods.

As more GM crops can be grown on relatively small parcels of land, GM crops are an answer to feeding growing world populations.

GM foods are safe. Changing a few genes here and there does not make a crop toxic or dangerous.

The meddling with nature argument made against GM foods doesn't hold water. There are many things that human beings have transformed to serve their purpose.

Scientists can choose which genes to manipulate, but they don't yet know where in the DNA to precisely insert these genes and they have no way of controlling gene expression.

Genes don't work in isolation, changing a few could change the whole picture, with unpredictable and different effects under different circumstances.

It is not correct to tout genetically modified food without evaluating the risks sufficiently. Or at least proving conclusively that there are no risks.

Many GM companies don't label their foods as being GM foods. There is concern about a GM bias affecting business. But not labeling is wrong and unfair to the consumers who should have the right to know what they are buying and indeed to decide whether they want to buy GM food or not. Even if health safety factors are not an issue, some people might have moral or religious objections. They should not have to eat GM food if they don't want to.

GM food will end food diversity if everyone starts growing the same standardized crops.

Herbicide-resistant and pesticide-resistant crops could give rise to super-weeds and super-pests that would need newer, stronger chemicals to destroy them.

GM crops could cross-pollinate with nearby non-GM plants and create ecological problems. If this were to happen with GM foods containing vaccines, antibiotics, contraceptives and so on, it would very well turn into a human health nightmare.

The claim of ending world hunger with GM food is a false claim. World hunger is not caused by shortage of food production, but by sheer mismanagement, and lack of access to food brought about by various social, financial and political causes.

The GM technology companies patent their crops and also engineer crops so that harvested grain germs are incapable of developing. This is not empowering to impoverished Third World farmers, who cannot save seeds for replanting and have to buy expensive seeds from the companies every time. The new technology also interferes with their traditional agricultural ways which may be more suited to their conditions.

CONTROWERSY

While it is evident that there is a food supply issue; the question is whether GM can solve world hunger problems. Several scientists argue that in order to meet the demand for food in the developing world, a second green revolution with increased use of GM crops is needed. Others argue that there is more than enough food in the world and that the hunger crisis is caused by problems in food distribution and politics, not production.]Recently some critics have changed their minds on the issue with respect to the need for additional food supplies.“Genetic modification is analogous to nuclear power: nobody loves it, but climate change has made its adoption imperative,” says economist Paul Collier of Oxford University. "Declining genetic modification makes a complicated issue more complex. Genetic modification offers both faster crop adaptation and a biological, rather than chemical, approach to yield increases."

On the other hand, many believe that GMF’s have not been a success and that we should devote our efforts and money into another solution. “We need biodiversity intensification that works with nature’s nutrient and water cycles, not against them,” says Vandana Shiva. Shiva, the founder of Navdanya, the movement of 500,000 seed keepers and organic farmers in India, argues that GMF’s have not increased yields. Recently, Doug Gurian-Sherman, a member of the Union of Concerned Scientists, a nonprofit science advocacy group, published a report called “Failure to Yield”, in which he stated that in a nearly 20 year record, genetically engineered crops have not increased yields.
Taking a more technical approach, GMF’s help farmers produce, despite the odds or any environmental barriers. “While new technology must be tested before it is commercially released, we should be mindful of the risks of not releasing it at all,” says Per Pinstrup-Andersen professor of Food, Nutrition and Public Policy at Cornell University. Per Pinstrup-Anderson argues, “Misguided anti-science ideology and failure by governments to prioritize agricultural and rural development in developing countries brought us the food crisis.” He clearly states the challenge we face is not the challenge of whether we have enough resources to produce, but whether we will change our behavior.

Acceptance for GM

Not all consumers are opposed to GM food. Results from quantitative research in Belgium reveal five different consumer segments based on beliefs and attitudes towards GM (food): the Food Neophobics; Enthusiasts; Balancers; Cautious; Green Opponents. Only the Food Neophobics and the Green Opponents, who together make up about 50%, feel reluctant towards GM food. Consumer attitudes from the Balancers, the Cautious and the enthusiasts range from slightly positive to very positive. Each of these segments can be further characterised by: knowledge; general attitudes towards science technology, nature, food, health premium brands purchase intentions of generic and premium branded GM food products; information demand; socio-demographic characteristics such as age, gender and education. For effective communication about GM food, all these differences between the consumer segments must be taken into account. This asks for the development of a segmented communication policy.

Information come from:
http://inderscience.metapress.com/
http://www.brighthub.com/
http://www.wikipedia.com/

Photography come from:
http://images.google.pl/

ANNA H. PODLASKA