Genetically altered foods have recently become a subject of heated discussion among scientists, politicians, and journalists. It is hypothesized by some that such products may constitute a significant threat to the health of the global population, while others reject these misgivings and argue this is just a new stage in the development of science and technologies. Such authors as Jane Brody and David Ehrenfeld present opposing viewpoints on this issue. Jane Brody believes that there is no cause for panic. She draws a very interesting example: people support the use of biotechnology in agriculture but the majority of the public disapproves of genetic modification (Brody, unpaged). The paradox is that this is the same phenomenon. The key problem is that even the word “genetic” is perceived with some unexplainable apprehension.
However, this opinion is not shared by everyone. David Ehrenfeld points out that modern agricultural industry violates the principles of genetics. Modern food manufactures believe that it is possible to transplant genes into a different cellular environment and its functioning will not change. Yet, this premise is entirely erroneous because genes are conditioned by external factors (Ehrenfeld, unpaged). Furthermore, the scholar emphasizes the idea that contemporary producers heavily rely on the use of pesticides, and it is very seldom mentioned that these pesticides are associated with many health problems such as lymphoma. In her turn, Jane Brody sets stress on the benefits of genetically modified foods. According to the author, such products can significantly minimize the health risk of the population, because such crops do not require the use of pesticides (Broody, unpaged).
This discussion indicates that the arguments, advanced by both writers are rather persuasive. It has to be admitted that the effects of genetic modification of agricultural products have not been thoroughly examined. The problem is that these effects can manifest themselves only after a long period of time. This is why contemporary manufactures should be more careful while using these technologies. But on the other hand, such products can be of great assistance to developing countries and people, suffering from starvation. On the whole, it is rather difficult to assess the quality of the authors arguments, because they look at this problem from different angles. However, David Ehrenfeld’s arguments appear to be more grounded because the scholar refers to scientific findings in his discussion, while Jane Brody carefully avoids speaking about the dangers of genetic engineering.
Works Cited
Brody Jane. “Gene Altered Foods: A Case Against Panic” The New York Times, 2000. Web.
Ehrenfeld David. “A techno-pox upon the land.(negative side-effects of the Green Revolution and agricultural genetic engineering)”. Harpers Magazine: 295.n1769 (1997): 13(5). General OneFile. Gale. Apollo Library-Univ of Phoenix.