SlideShare utilise les cookies pour améliorer les fonctionnalités et les performances, et également pour vous montrer des publicités pertinentes. Si vous continuez à naviguer sur ce site, vous acceptez l’utilisation de cookies. Consultez nos Conditions d’utilisation et notre Politique de confidentialité.
SlideShare utilise les cookies pour améliorer les fonctionnalités et les performances, et également pour vous montrer des publicités pertinentes. Si vous continuez à naviguer sur ce site, vous acceptez l’utilisation de cookies. Consultez notre Politique de confidentialité et nos Conditions d’utilisation pour en savoir plus.
Hazardous Effects of GMOs Call for their Labeling
The traditional crossbreeding has created the genetically modified crops. The markets are
nowadays flooded with Genetically Modified Food. People can now grow crops of their choice-
the ones that have certain desirable characteristics. This thus puts at risk the lives of consumers
who buy these foods without knowledge of the health hazards. However, if proper labeling is
done on food products, chances are high that the lives of many people could be saved from
possible harm. Labeling provides proper information on the contents of food substances. It
informs consumers on what they should exactly buy after considering their safety. Despite the
importance of labeling in promoting consumer safety, the United States of America still ignores
the consumer calls for food labeling. The consumers understand the need of food labeling.
Studies show that ninety percent of American consumers know the need to label food products
for enhanced food safety. Do you know the importance of labeling? Why has the United States
refused to grant its citizens this vital right? Why should it do it now? This paper therefore
discusses the significances of Genetically Modified food labeling that ought to be considered by
the American government for the safety of the general American consumers and visitors.
Labeling Genetically Modified Food helps reduce the numerous health complications and
subsequent deaths. Recent studies have clearly linked genetically engineered food to the high
instances of kidney damages, liver failures, abnormal growth and many other serious ailments
(Freedman 83). Despite the harsh reality associated with the production, sale, and consumption
of these engineered foods, the United States government still allows its consumer populace waste
themselves through daily consumption of GMOs. Consumers are still allowed to purchase and
consume genetically engineered foods. Almost every kitchen and grocery in every household in
the United States contains these harmful foods. Worryingly, 88% of united state’s corn is
genetically modified. Similarly, 93% of Soya Beans, 95% of sugar beets, and 75% of processed
food in supermarkets have been genetically engineered. All these make the consumer to have
limited chances of getting food products that are safe for their consumption. The people are
always struggling to avoid these harmful food products and lead a healthier life. The United
States government is however dedicated to maintaining healthy business environments that put
fore consumer safety (Institute of Medicine 6). This is seen through the government’s
unrelenting support and cooperation with organizations like World Health Organization and is
policies on consumer safety. However, most of these policies do not focus on the products being
sold but rather the way transactions are done and how consumers are generally treated. Key
concerns include pricing and quality of products. With the emerging trends on food engineering
and subsequent food poisoning, it is high time that the American government consider labeling
as another efficient tool to reduce consumer risks and deaths.
Informed consumers make appropriate choices on the foods to purchase and consume.
This therefore reduces the government’s risk of losing important human resource to the GMO
menace. Genetically modified foods are known for their introduction of many health side effects.
Stunted growth among the consumers in the United States will translate into an equally stunted
economy where issues of development are not deliberated on. Additionally, the prevalence of
diseases due to the engineered foods impairment of the immune systems makes the American
population an unhealthy population. It is however worrying to note the reluctance of
organizations like the FDA in implementing Genetically Modified food labeling. How can these
organizations argue against human life!? The statistics speak aloud on almost every hospital
concerning the big numbers being lost daily due to engineered food effects. The number of
people living with lethal conditions brought about by these foods calls for the adoption of
preventive measures that will bring down or reduce the effects of the same. For these reason,
organizations like the FDA should not claim that labeling engineered foods will harm the market
by making them look different. But making them different is the only way to save the people
from their innumerable side effects! This makes the situation in America concerning the
engineered food sale and consumption dire and in need of effective mitigating steps. It is
contradicting though to note the irony of institutions like the FDA. They claim that labeling
GMOs would make them different yet the research by scientist before their introduction
indicated GMO’s uniqueness in content and effects. There is therefore need for the government
to adopt and fully implement the Federal Food and Cosmetic Act. This act provides for the
judicial execution of institutions like FDA. This is arrived at basically on the grounds that
providing misleading information to the general public is equivalent to killing the whole of it. In
fact, the act calls for the inclusion of all relevant information that a consumer ought to know.
This should be done in its entirety for the benefit of the general public. It is thus ironical for the
government’s branches to conflict over the universally important concern over consumer health
and safety. It only means that the industries sometimes collaborate with some organizations like
the FDA to harm the consumers for a profit. This is confirmed by the FDA’s straightforward
acceptance of industry information on food products yet the information is insufficient to give
the exact contents of the food products. This insufficient and misleading information on food
products should attract punitive government interventions. Labeling is the solution to the many
instances of engineered foods’ killings.
Experts like doctors, nurses, physicians, clinicians, and other medical practitioner’s
advice the people of America to eat safe foods. They do this via several media. They use the
radio, television, internet, and many other available media. They warn against eating certain
foods that have been contaminated with organic chemicals. Among these food products are rice,
soy, and sugar beets. Their stern warnings revolve around the many diseases and complications
one gets by consuming engineered foods. Among these ailments are: stunted growth, impaired
immune system, bleeding stomachs, abnormal and potentially dangerous cell growth in the
intestines, and impaired blood cell developments among others (Mark 4). However, providing
this crucial information to the general public achieves its intended purpose minimally if the
public do not have relevant information on what to buy and what not to buy. For this case,
labeling comes in handy in providing this information. Labeling that is done properly enables the
consumer to decide on what to purchase based on created awareness on the product’s content.
The Center for Food Safety has always worked to create his awareness on the grassroots but
much ought to be done. The government should introduce further laws and regulations to put
labeling of food products first (Costanigro 265). The consumer is to make choices that are
relevant and working towards avoiding them from the engineered foods. The claim by industries
that labeling would side line their products in the market is null and void. Business on food
products should not be done at the expense of consumer safety. Profit oriented institutions that
compromise consumer safety should thus be subjected to punitive government laws to be made
in order to correct their malpractice. America is only safe when its population is healthy and
meaningfully impacting on their lives and the life of the country at large. For this reason, the
prior decisions allowing for the sale of unlabeled engineered food products thus remains a mere
political decision that had no scientific base in whatsoever way.
The government should not let down the increasing wave of food safety awareness that is
within the general American population. The main concern is to stop pretence and enhance
consumer welfare. It should also come to the cognition of the government that leading a healthy
population is simpler than having to always budget for the series of medications heralded by
engineered food consumption. Though the government is providing evidences that it is working
hard to provide this much needed support in creating consumer safety awareness, many needs to
be done. In 2013, more than half the states in the United States introduced and passed bills that
require thorough labeling of engineered food products. This is thus a walk away from the
previous false doctrines that placed industries’ profit on the fore to the detriment of consumer
health and destinies. The defeat of the 2011 policy was a key milestone in the food industry
(Hannon 56). This is because this policy had derailed any attempts to bring the consumer safety
measures into effect. It had wasted the efforts of many good will individuals, groups, and
organizations that wanted consumer safety be placed first. Currently, the FDA is required to
provide and foster the passing of relevant information concerning a food products that can help
consumers make informed choices based on their health concerns (Kimbrel 348). The struggle is
not over yet. It is common for American organizations to provide misleading product
information if strict follow-ups are not put in place. The government should therefore institute
proper ways to do this follow-up and save American people from the hazardous effects of
engineered foods (Senauer 5).
Additionally, labeling engineered foods help in protecting consumer and general
American environment. The production and ultimate consumption of engineered foods does not
only harm the American consumers but also the American environment. The enormous amounts
of gene transfers done annually in America (transgenes) from modified crops to ordinary ones
lead to hybridization. Hybridization alters the entire ecosystems when hybrid crops flourish
(Teitel 36). These genes get indirectly to consumers and animals thus affecting their routine traits
and operations. The main impact this will have on the organism that consumes them is the
organism’s development of antibiotic resistance. A DNA is likely to be digested faster into much
smaller pieces than a gene and this makes this development hastened. In fact, production of
engineered food increases chances of poisoning all forms of life ranging from aquatic to the
tiniest insects (Metak 384). Government’s move to foster food labeling may help reduce the sale
of engineered foods and ultimately lead to the failure of industries producing these foods. This
will save the national and international ecosystem from harm.
In conclusion, the American government should look for best ways to stop the production
and sale of unlabeled genetically engineered food products. This will help protect the consumers
in the United States and also protect the American ecosystem. Key steps to be taken include
introduction of punitive legislations that give focus to proper food labeling, creation of
awareness on the American populace on the need to only but labeled food products, and the
enhancement of industrial ethics. The industries should produce what is safe to the people who
are going to fed on their products. To take the lead the promotion of healthy food production and
consumption are the individual American, the food production industries, the businessmen
dealing with these food products, and the government (Sharatt 94). Such unity is what will
guarantee America success in this course.
Costanigro, Marco, and Lusk, Jayson. The Signaling Effect of Mandatory Labels on Genetically
Engineered Food. Food Policy 49.1(2014): 259-267. Print.
Freedman, David. Are Engineered Foods Evil? Scientific American 309.3(2013):80-85. Print
Hannon, Joseph C., Kerry, Joseph, Cruz-Romero, M., Morris, Michael, and Cummis, Enda.
Advances and Challenges for the Use of Engineered Nonoparticles in food Contact
Materials. Trends in Food Science and Technology 43.1(2015): 43-62. Print
Institute of Medicine (U.S). Safety of Genetically Engineeered Foods: Approaches to Assessing
Unintended Health. Washington, D.C.: National Academic Press, 2004. Ebook.
Kimbrell, George, A. and Paulsen, Aurora L.The Constitutionality of State-Mandated Labeling
for genetically Engineered Foods: A Definite Defense. Vermont Law Review 39.2(2014):
Mark, J. Health and the Modern Home. New York, NY: Routledge, 2007.
Metak, Amal, M., Nabhani, Farhad, and Cornolly, Stephen, N. Migration of Engineered
Nanoparticles from Packaging into Food Products. Food Science and Technology
64.2(2015), 781-787. Print
Senauer, Benjamin. Mandatory Labeling of genetically Engineered (GE) Foods: The Showdown
Begins. The Magazine of Food, Farm, & Resources 28.3 (2013): 1-5. Print
Sharratt, Lucy. Genetically Engineered Foods: Past, Present, and Future? Canada’s Natural
Health and Wellness Magazine 352(2011): 91-95. Print
Teitel, Martin, and Kimberly. Wison. Genetically Engineered Foods: Changing theNature of
Nature: What You Need to Know to Protect Yourself, Your Family, and Your Planet.
Rochester, vt: Park Street Press, 1999, ebook.