Familial Food Essay, Research Paper
Introduction The usage of genetically technology in agribusiness and nutrient production has an impact, non merely on the environment and biodiversity, but besides on human wellness. Therefore, thorough biosafety appraisal requires, non merely an rating of environmental impacts of genetically engineered beings, but besides an appraisal of the hazards that genetically engineered nutrient airs for the wellness of consumers. Let us take deeper expression at some of the facets related to genetically engineered nutrients. What is Familial Engineering? Genetic technology is a research lab technique used by scientists to alter the Deoxyribonucleic acid of life beings. Deoxyribonucleic acid is the design for the individualism of an being. The being relies upon the information stored in breasts DNA for the direction of every biochemical procedure. The life, growing and alone characteristics of the being depend on its Deoxyribonucleic acid. The sections of DNA, which have been associated with specific characteristics or maps of an being, are called cistrons. Molecular life scientists have discovered many enzymes, which change the construction of DNA in life beings. Some of these enzymes can cut and fall in strands of DNA. Using such enzymes, scientists learned to cut specific cistrons from Deoxyribonucleic acid and to construct customized DNA utilizing these cistrons. They besides learned about vectors, strands of DNA like viruses, which can infect a cell and insert themselves into its DNA. Scientists started to construct vectors, which incorporated cistrons of their choosing and used vectors to infix these cistrons into the Deoxyribonucleic acid of life beings. Familial applied scientists believe that they can better the nutrients we eat by making this. At first glimpse, this might look exciting to some people. Deeper consideration reveals some advantages and serious dangers. What are the advantages of Genetically Engineered Food? Genetic technology gives today s research workers considerable advantages in works genteelness plans. + Predictability Scientist can place the specific cistron for a given trait, do a transcript of that cistron for interpolation into a works, and be certain that merely the new cistron is added to the works. This eliminates the backcrossing, traditional works breeders must make to extinguish immaterial unsought cistrons that are often introduced when utilizing cross-hybridization. + Significant acceleration of the development timetable. New technique takes about 5 old ages to take the unwanted traits compared to 12 old ages of procedure with the traditional techniques. Plant breeders do non utilize recombinant DNA techniques entirely. Alternatively they use a combination of new and traditional methods to supply a works with quality, output, conditions and plague opposition and other desirable traits. + Improved quality with more picks for the clients. Genetically engineered nutrient particularly fruits and veggies allow to hold plentifulness of clip for transportation and sale and it helps to maintain the them stay ripe without acquiring rotten. Some of the fruits and veggies need warm climes to turn, so most off-season shop them must go a long manner after they are picked. One illustration is the Flavr Savr tomatoes. To last their journey intact, tomatoes are picked while they are green, which is a nutrient which is a good manner to avoid bruising, but which consequences in a tomato that is frequently described as holding the consistence and mouth-feel of a tennis ball. In the instance of Flavr Savr tomatoes, the company solved the decomposition job by infixing a reversed copy- an antisense cistron of the cistron that encodes the enzyme that consequences in tomato spoilage. This suppresses the enzyme that consequences in decomposing, leting the tomato to remain mature, but non decompose, up to 10 yearss plentifulness of clip for transportation and sale. Refrigeration is non necessary. What are the dangers of Genetically Engineered Food? + Is it safe to eat? There has been no equal testing to guarantee that pull outing cistrons that perform an seemingly utile map as portion of that works or animate being is traveling to hold the same effects if inserted into a wholly unrelated species. To consumers, most genetically engineered nutrients are basically nutrients with added substances, normally proteins. This is because cistrons are translated into proteins by cells. Therefore, when a familial applied scientist adds, say, a bacterial cistron to a tomato, he or she is basically adding a bacterial protein to that tomato. In most instances these added proteins would probably turn out safe for human ingestion. Nevertheless, merely as with conventional nutrient additives, substances added to foods via familial technology may in some cases prove risky. Unfortunately, nutrient allergic reactions are ill understood, and in many instances scientists will non be able to prove possible allergenicity of genetically engineered nutrients. Even if there was some testing, the long term affects to worlds, animate beings, and the environment from these modified cistrons get awaying and blending with unmodified 1s are unknown. + Health Hazards There are several differences between the normal genteelness procedure and the unreal familial use procedure. One key difference is the usage of extremely infective viruses for unreal familial use as a booster to hex on the introduced cistron. Some of the viruses used are extremely infective. Familial use can increase the hazard that the works will develop toxic or allergy-causing compounds. Another possibility is that regulate exposure to foreign DNA and RNA stuff inserted into these unreal nutrients could do allergic reactions or autoimmune disease. Allergens A figure of molecular mechanisms have besides been identified through which the familial use of nutrient bring forthing beings could bring forth new allergens or increase the allergenicity of proteins usually present in nutrient bring forthing beings. Because allergen-carrying transgenic nutrients will in most instances maintain the visual aspect of their natural, non-allergenic opposite numbers, they pose a serious jeopardy to the consumer. Consumer will non be able to avoid these allergenic nutrients, because they will non be able to separate them from the corresponding natural nutrients. The labeling of all genetically engineered nutrients would, of class, solve this job and would besides do it possible for wellness governments to follow allergen job that arise. Toxins & A ; Poisons In add-on to
allergenicity, recombinant proteins could manifest a variety of other biological activities, and in the case of recombinant enzymes, could catalyze the production of other compounds with biologic activities not normally present in a particular food. For instance such substances could act as toxins or irritants and could act at the biochemical, cellular, tissue or organ levels to disrupt a range of physiological functions. An example of a class of genetically engineered foods that are of particular concern are those that have been modified to produce biological control agents such as the family of insecticidal Bt enterotoxins. The Bt toxin, which has been used topically in organic farming, has powerful biological activity. If consumed in larger amounts it can become a toxin. Plants genetically-manipulated to produce Bt toxin produce at least 1000 times more Bt toxin per acre than does a heavy application of Bt directly on plants. There was another case where one company genetically engineered a microorganism to produce L-tryptophan at high levels killed almost 37 people and made 1500 permanently disabled by using that product. This was due to the presence of traces of a toxic contaminant. This contaminant was extremely powerful. Damage to Nutrition quality A 1999 study by Dr. Marc Lappe published in the Journal of Medicinal Food found that concentrations of beneficial phytoestrogen compounds thought to protect against heart disease and cancer were lower in genetically modified soybeans than in traditional strains. These and other studies, including Dr. Pusztai s, indicate that genetically engineered food will likely result in foods lower in quality and nutrition. For example the milk from cows injected with rBGH contains higher levels of pus, bacteria, and fat. Sources of risk Unmodified Organism (UMO) The genetic engineering of foods involves the introduction of new genetic information into a food-producing organism. Some of the health risks associated with genetically engineered foods can be anticipated on the basis of what we already know about the characteristics of the organism in its unmodified state (called the unmodified organism UMO) from which the genetically engineered organism is to be generated. Gene Source (GS) Other aspects of the risk associated with genetically engineered foods can be deduced from the characteristic of the organism that is the source of the genetic information introduced into the food producing organism (called the gene source or GS). For instance, if a gene derived from peanuts is introduced into a tomato, food produced from the resulting genetically engineered tomato might cause allergic reactions in people that are allergic to tomatoes (the unmodified organism) or to peanuts (the gene source). Procedure of Genetic Engineering In addition to UMO and GS, there is another source of potential risks, which is the procedure of genetic engineering itself. Current recombinant DNA methods and those likely to be developed in the future are all capable of accidentally introducing unintended changes in the function and structure of the food-producing organism. As a result, the genetically engineered food may have characteristics that were not intended by the genetic engineer, and that cannot be foreseen on the basis of the known characteristics of the unmodified organism or gene source. Labeling Issues FDA requires labeling of genetically engineered foods under certain exceptional circumstances. Since most genetically engineered foods will be indistinguishable in appearance from non-engineered foods, consumers will generally not know what they are buying. FDA ignores consumers right to know by ignoring longstanding regulations that require in most circumstances that manufactures label foods to disclose their ingredients. For example, researchers have genetically engineered vegetables to produce a new protein sweetener. Existing FDA regulations mandate that companies disclose sweeteners added to canned vegetables via conventional means. Yet, FDA will not require that proteins sweeteners added to vegetables via genetic engineering be labeled as ingredients. Labeling is vital to food allergic individuals, who need to know when their purchases are potentially allergenic. FDA will require labeling of foods genetically engineered to contain potential allergens from only the most commonly allergenic foods a requirement that threatens individuals with less common food allergies. FDA also will require labeling if a company uses genetic engineering techniques to change a food s composition significantly. For example, when one manufacturer modified canola to produce increased levels of lauric and myristic acids in the seed oil, FDA agreed that the common or usual name for this oil would be laurate canola oil in order to distinguish it from traditional canola oil. Some vegetarians and individuals who follow religious dietary laws have told FDA that they want to know when animal genes are added to plants used as foods. FDA has taken no steps to accommodate their dietary beliefs and restrictions. What can you do as a consumer ? Look for soy products and ingredients like tofu, tempeh, miso, soy sauce, soymilk that are organic. All other soy ingredients are almost genetically manipulated and herbicide- treated. The same is true for canola, corn, dairy products and potatoes. Look for organic corn, potato and dairy ingredients when you shop. It may be best to avoid canola altogether because it is rarely organic and is usually chemically treated. A recent experiment conducted by independent expert DR. Alpad Puszatai in the United Kingdom has shown that genetically manipulated foods can, when fed to animals in reasonable amounts, cause very gradual organ damage and immune system damage. Conclusion Reading the label is an important part of shopping for a consumer. If consumers do not want to consume genetically manipulated foods, they can always contact the store managers and ask them to carry more organic foods in the store. Most of the time the food product manufacturers also pay attention to consumers feed back. Further, if one has questions or concerns about such issues, one can always contact a nutritionist who is aware and well informed of the pros and cons of Genetically Engineered Foods.