Genetically engineering/modified food (GMFs)
Scientific and technological innovations have been used to solve major disasters facing the world; hunger is one of the oldest social disasters facing the human and animal race. Different countries have varying views on whether genetically manufactured foods (GMFs) are a lasting solution to the world food of problem or they are a solution that creates another problem. Supported GMFs perceive innovation in technology and science as the healer of world economic, social, and political problems.
GMFs results from plants or animals whose growth and development has been facilitated by insertion or deletion of some natural genes; the main aim is to have animal and plants maturing fast for consumption. GMFs were first introduced in the market in early 1990 however, different viewpoints on whether they should be fully adopted or not have limited their adoption. Some of the early-modified foods include potatoes, tomatoes, nuts, peas, and pigs. This paper, in the form of a dialogue between Nathalie, a protagonist of GMFs, and Ricky, an antagonist of GMFs, discusses the opposing sides of GMFs.
Writer’s position
I support the production of GMFs in large quality; I hold the opinion that they can offer a lasting solution to food problems facing the world. I take this opinion after analyzing the potential of the world in producing food naturally and the population growth rate. As much as there are environmental and health implications, GMFs can offer the world a food breakthrough.
Dialogue
(Both parties sitting down and taking a deep breath)
Nathalie: (clearing his throat) with the current world population growth rate, natural resources have been strained, and expecting that they will support the world’s food needs without taking on measures to facilitate and fasten production is not being realistic. I agree that there have been measures to restore, conserve, and manage the environment; however, the success of set problems is wanting. Take an example of South Africa and the United States of America that have accepted the production, they have been able to feed their population better than countries like Kenya, which debates whether to accept them or not are ongoing.
Ricky: (rubbing his hands together) Nathalie, I understand your concerns, however, GMFs are short-term solutions that will cause more danger than good in the end. Decisions made by countries like Austria, France, Germany, Greece, and Luxembourg to ban the production of GMFs was reached after close analysis of dangers that they can cause to both human and animals.
Nathalie: Ricky, let me give you some of the advantages that GMFs have over none-genetically modified foods (NGMFs), GMFs are more resistant to pest and diseases. In their modification, scientists consider the location that seed will be planted, thus will make brands that can resistance diseases prone in an area. They also consider the climate of an area to ensure that the model produced will be effective. Secondly, GMFs grow faster than NGMFs, these food take a short period to mature and thus are an effective way to cure hunger in the world. They also have high protein content than NGMFs.
Ricky: (scratching his head) other than having food on the table, the quality and health implications of food taken by animals and human beings should be of great concern. The greatest asset that the world can have is a healthy population. Chemicals used to modify and enhance production have negative implications for users of the foods; the dangers include diseases like cancer, liver damage, and kidney failure when used by human beings. Alternatively, there have been campaigns to conserve, preserve, and manage the environment however, GMFs are a threat to the environment as the chemicals used limit the productivity of the land.
Nathalie: (smiling and shaking his head as a sign of understanding), Ricky, you ague well and I like you stand, however, it is important to be a realist; the most burning problem facing the world today is not diseases, it’s not environmental damage, but it needs to feed the increasing population. As much as your concerns hold, if the world can handle the problem at hand then the solution to arising problems can be devised.
Ricky: (clearing his throat), what is the need of creating a problem; Nathalie, you seem to forget on how hard it is to solve a solution, some diseases that can arise as a result of chemical use have proved to be un-treatable; chemicals used threaten the natural way of producing. When these chemicals are used, they violate the principle of sustainable development where the current generation should utilize available resources in a way that does not limit the enjoyment that future generation will have, thus GMFs will offer a short-term solution for example, and soils cannot support the production for a long period like the case of NGMFs.
Nathalie: as much as there is a need to protect the environment and ensure that the world is healthy, the effects that drought has, is more devastating than what diseases and environmental damage can have. People in the different worlds are dying of hunger especially in developing countries, these people need to be fed first so as they can have the energy and will to look for a solution for their problems.
I think the debate is interesting and is continuous in different parts of the world; as much as there is a need to feed the world population, I have noted with concerns your arguments, but I still plead with you to understand and see the situation from my point of view (Engdahl, 360).
Ricky: (smiling as a sign of relief) I see, you point Nathalie, and I support your side of the story, however, I think the move to GMFs should be taken but some modifications need to be done in the system. The same technology that developed the foods should innovate methods of preventing dangers that the foods are likely to bring to human and animal lives (Engdahl, 361).
Nathalie: Oh yes, I agree some modifications need to be made. (Standing), thank you and have a good day.
Ricky: (standing and stretching his hand for a handshake) welcome and have a good day.
My opinion
Despite environmental and health dangers brought about by GMFs, the world is in urgent need of a constant supply of food to feed its growing population. Depending on NGMFs will worsen the drought situation facing some parts of the world especially developing countries. Food is a human basic need, economists, sociologists, and politicians should aim at having food security before embarking on other developmental matters.
I support the European Commission of 1st December 2004, which called for support from national and international bodies to support the production of GMFs; however, it is important to put on measures to reduce the negative effects of GMFs.
Works Cited
Engdahl, Williams. Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation. Montreal: Global Research, 2007.