Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Doing GMOs or not shouldn't be the big question; let's look at the pros and cons

Plants are genetically engineered to enhance certain characteristics.
“State under fire for allowing import of GMOs” read one of the headlines in the local dailies sometime back. Whatever that meant, I strongly believe the state shouldn’t have been put under fire for importing genetically modified foods to feed its starving people. If I was to choose between feeding on GM food and starving to death my choice would be certainly the former.
And not that there is nothing good with GM foods as they are being portrayed; most antagonists of GM foods are social scientists who dwell their arguments on no scientific proof but hearsay. The fact which is not being said here is that science and technology can be used for the benefit of the human race and in this context - Biotechnology.
Biotechnology is a suit of tools that allow plant breeders to introduce a greater array of novelty into their plant varieties, and select which work, much faster than they could using conventional plant breeding techniques. There is therefore nothing inherently evil or Frankenstein-like about genetically modified plants.
Dismissing GM foods just like that will be unthoughtful of us. What people should demand for is the enforcement of the bioethics act to the latter and the right to be informed. All GM foods should be labeled with all the ingredients for people to make informed choices and avoid consumption of materials they are allergic to unknowingly.  

No comments:

Post a Comment