Cristina Seda Transgenic Food vs Regular Food The first plant with modified DNA was a tomato called

the Flavr Savr, and was modified to have a slower ripening process and thus, be fresh for a longer period of time. t was approved b! the FDA in "##$, and since then criticisms of geneticall! modified foods have been rampant. Criticisms are not alwa!s based on scientific studies, and are sometimes mere assumptions or common beliefs about geneticall! modified organisms. Despite the criticisms, strong advocates are also e%istent and argue that geneticall! modified organisms present opportunities in helping eradicate world hunger as the! are cheaper and more resistant to disease than regular food, as well as possibl! presenting health benefits given b! engineering the DNA inside of them. &n the other hand, organic food refers to crops and livestoc' grown without the use of DNA engineering, fertili(ers, pesticides, growth hormones and feeding the livestoc' with organic food, among other things. &rganic food is more e%pensive and harder to find, ma'ing it more of a rarit! among consumers. This is due to the cost of producing it b! natural means and the possibilit! of the farmer losing his crop due to disease, from which transgenic crops do not suffer from. )eople generall! view organic food as being healthier than transgenic food, but is there an! truth to this claim* Transgenic food presents man! benefits born out of scientific advancement. The first benefit is pest resistance. For thousands of !ears, insect pests have caused staggering losses of crops and then, famine among the population. This is especiall! prevalent and dangerous in a developing nation that does not have the resources to deal with mass famines caused b! food shortages. Another benefit of pest resistant crops is using less pesticides on the crops which could potentiall! have serious health and environmental ha(ards. A similar +ualit! of ,-&.s is herbicide tolerance. Farmers use herbicides to remove weeds, and a herbicide tolerant crop will be resistant to ver! powerful herbicides and could potentiall! prevent environmental damage b! reducing the amount of herbicides used. Disease resistance is the most important +ualit!, as it further ensures the growth of these crops and therefore an ade+uate amount of food to prevent famine. Nutrition in ,-&.s is also another area being researched right now, and it is especiall! relevant to poor countries that suffer from high rates of malnutrition and hunger. For e%ample, golden rice is a geneticall! modified rice crop with a high content of beta/carotene or vitamin A that helps tac'le the problem of blindness in third/world countries. 0nfortunatel!, this safe and potentiall! vastl! helpful crop has not come to the mar'et due to anti/,-& protesting. Critics of geneticall! modified organisms often cite environments ha(ards, health ris's and economic concerns to 1ustif! their stances. Concerns of environmental ha(ards of transgenic foods include the unintended harm to other organisms, the reduced effectiveness of pesticides on pests and the gene transfer to non/target species. These issues could be addressed b! creating sterile plants that cannot breed or buffer (ones around crops made of non/geneticall! modified crops. 2uman health ris's possibl! presented b! ,- crops are allergenicit! and the un'nown effects on human health. Allergenicit! means that the introduction of genes from a plant that causes allergies 3li'e peanuts4 into another would cause allergic reactions. This could be solved with e%tensive labeling and research. The un'nown effects on human health is wh! governments implement e%tensive research before approving transgenic crops on their mar'ets, and most scientists agree that transgenic foods do not present a ris' to human health. 5conomic concerns over ,- foods are probabl! the most convincing of the three, as for e%ample, debates over patents and intellectual propert! from corporations such as -onsato and farmers are ta'en to the courtrooms. &rganic food, on the other side of the debate, is not shown to be an! more nutritious or healthier than transgenic foods. There are some claims that organic food is actuall! more dangerous, as farmers use slipshod techni+ues that allow for bacterias such as salmonella and 5. coli which can

cause serious outbrea's and deaths. &rganic foods also do not present the possible benefits that transgenic foods do, such as tac'ling disease through genes in the plants. )urel! organic foods thus now remain more of a lu%ur! item than the norm in most places. The debate about transgenic foods versus regular foods is not li'el! to end an!time soon. There is an increasing sentiment against transgenic foods, which hinders the scientific development of potentiall! life saving crops. Nevertheless, the effects of transgenic foods must continue to be closel! regulated b! comparison to regular foods and properl! labeled, as people have a right to 'now what the! are consuming. ,overnments must also carefull! watch over corporations, since the! might abuse power over patents and eschew scientific studies in order to ma'e more mone!. 6et the benefits of transgenic foods are monumental advances, and people must not discard them before e%amining the evidence presented.