Issues Surrounding GMC foods paper


Currently, there have periodical issues favoring or contrasting Genetically Modified Crops (GMC) policy and technical enactment. Concerns have been directed to scrutinize the role of GMC in; firstly, creating a hazardous environment and secondly, the role of GMC in mitigating the production of natural of foods. For these two reasons, there has been a heightened debate on the usage of the GMC technology in substituting against a natural environment. The commencing research will prove that politics surrounding GMC technology are primarily responsible for the improper development of the technology. The study will further justify that there is a need for seconding research to examine possible stratagems of providing proper and reliable GMC without contention.


It is possible to realize a less volatile GMC technology and policy if jurisdictions fostered culture collectiveness in policy development. The commencing research paper will add value to this opinion by introducing a plethora of factors that seconds the background nature of the GMC foods provision in relation to GMC policy as well as technology. In particular, the research will assess the History, and the technical aspects are surrounding GMC provision. Secondly, the research will provide a comprehensive analysis of debatable that amounts to the heightened political situation of GMC foods. This section will provide an unbiased presentation of the claim of this report. In an encapsulation, the research will provide the authors opinion in response to the continuous research of GMC policy and technology.

Literature review


Traditionally, farmers have pursued strategies, which would grant proper provision of foods against hostile weather conditions. Wisconsin (1) provides a list of environmental and natural challenges that prompts farmers to be creative as far as, crop farming is concerned. Part of this includes impacts of weeds on crops, insects and climatic changes. Methods have further stretched to enable the achievement of proper and rotational breeding of crops for farmers. For these reasons, pressure on quality farming was chiefly responsible to the adoption of synthetic methodologies of farming. GMC farming was on the only decisive approach that would solidify plants to be repellant to several biological and natural conditions.

For the better half of the 20th century, and in the 21 century Genetically Modified Crops (GMC) have continued gaining influence in the western world. Khush (1) establishes that International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) instituted a creative partnership to facilitate crop transfer using biotechnology applications in industrial countries.  ISAAA a brainchild by Clive James continued to offer extensive data from multiple researches. Concern was directed in examining possible safety measures by using GMC foods.  This opinion was backed by the Wisconsin Briefs (2012) in what the journal provides as periodical controversies on consumer safety and environmental concerns.


Technically, genetically modified plants involve biotitic scheme of adding one or more genes to a plant’s genome. Another lucrative approach is the application of Agrobacterium tumefacians. Scientist investigates comprehensive profiling of crop composition by using of GM techniques.  Wisconsin (1) establishes that other methods currently in play are the usage of gene-gun. This technology utilizes biologically inert particles of the subject plant by usage of tungsten atoms. The gene-gun delivers simpler plamids encoded on a therapeutic transgene protein with no vector-specific antigens. This contrasts with viral methods of gene-delivery, which provides a strong immune mechanism.

Secondly, scientists have improvised the T-DNA random plant genome site. The bacterium is a vector that enables transportation of foreign genes into plants. The bacterium can further influence the endosperm promoter to ensure that only particular genes are obtained and improvised. Recent research in relation to GM has seen the adoption of Glyphosate resistance (, 312). This criterion has overseen the proper development of selective herbicides as applied in grass and grain. Technically, Glyphosate is applicable at 840 g/ha and is suitable to post-emergence application; for instance, Cotton fields.

Types of genetic engineering

From the above analysis, it is notable that DNA motivation is the central approach applied by GMC scientists. The inserted DNA is configured to ensure that it suits the hosts’ environment.  A recent and lucrative manipulation by using the transplastomic technology has seen subunits of carbon fixation enzyme Rubisco. Wang et al, (6) establishes that, the gene is normally encoded on a plastic genome with a gene, which contains a small subunit that is nuclear-encoded. This includes efforts change the balance of final molecular products and tries to improve the efficiency of a plastic metabolic environment. The goal is to ensure that amino acids could be changed to improve enzyme activity. Critical experiments have been carried to ensure the transplastomic technology is applied in proper subunits sequences as better and reliable options.

Another reliable option is cisgenic modification as applied in intragenic plants. Cisgenes have constantly been referred as genes from main plants themselves. Viswanath and Strauss (1) argue that breeders of many types of annual crops provide dramatic changes on the composition on a shorter time specification. Although this approach has proved decisive to a variety of breeders, the aggregate time applied is not reliable enough to ensure that mutations are accomplished. Cisgenic modification has proved positive to intolerant inbreeding in highly heterozygous environments. With this in mind, it is notable that cisgenic plants can be treated better than other plants because of the similarity of the genes used in cisgenesis.

Debatable Issues


Although GMC has been effective in providing multiple solutions to food problems, it should be noted that their seconding concerns that catalyze the situation. Primarily, GMC have been associated with disheartening ailments; for instance, cancers. The commencing section will describe types of genetically modified crops based on gestation factors that raised questions on time applied in breeding a given crop pattern. Apart from health factors, Greenpeace (1) also identifies periodically environmental impacts of GM foods.  In fact, with time, the environmental effects of GMC are being established and well documented. Dona and Arvanitoyannis (2) establishes a controversial list of the act of silencing genes and their level of expression that can be presumed silencing of genes and seconding level of expression.  The duo further argues that biochemical pathways of plants may lead to disruption of body metabolism and this unpredictable. The consequence of this is the increased involvement of the toxic compounds in already existing ones.

In relation to environmental issues, Kruft (3) presents a plethora of contractual issues that relate to GMC foods. Contractual issues mean that the investing company controls the legal environment regulating seeds companies’ process. The situation becomes catastrophic if limit of liability is not honored.  Kruft (3) further provides a totality of three issues that are primarily responsible in accelerating the contractual issues problem. These include; firstly, limited rights to reuse or retain the seeds. This contract prevents the grower from retaining or saving the seed from the usage. A patent to that effect is established. The approach is not ethical since on overall, the grower is limited from constructing hybrids, and this limits the nature of his business.

Secondly, a contractual problem presents a binding arbitration that constrains relationship between private and seed companies. A binding arbitration is dangerous since this constrains the general seed development. Per se, petitions presented to the US Supreme Court in the last ten years often seek the capital regulation of GMC, nanotechnology, biotechnology and artificial intelligence (Nader, 56). These petitions not only do they head technical developments, but also to limit the proper cooperation of producers and consumers of given technology. Thirdly, as part of the contracting process, Kruft, establishes acceptance of limited liability.  In the light with this, Shelton and Romeis (35) assesses the impact of insurance on biodiversity in respect o f socioeconomic damage.  In a close analysis, the impacts of insurance have implication genetically engineered crops provides subsequent liability on a definite period.


According to European Centre of Tort and Insurance Law (16), there is a fundamental concern that arise causes harm, and they are liable in building contention on the validity of liability issues. In fact, in accordance to European centre of Tort and Insurance Law (25) European jurisdiction have evolved with individual claims of culture on distinct compensation of culture. A fundamental aspect of the liability law is that, a party must cause harm in order to be held liable for it. Technicality attributes cause damage due to gene of a precise producer. On one hand, the law relaxes the normal causation requirements involved between the damage and the defendant.

For this reason, one will notice that there are complexity associated in improvising proper GMC foods. The above passage state the law, here the research quotes the tort law and how it can be applied to impose liability on the GMO farmer whose field is nearest to the harvest. In most situations, the GMC/O farmer is expected to pay health losses inquired by the product consumers. The mechanism for repayment requires multiple payments from non-optimal incentives to take precautions. Consequently, the liable farmer is expected undertake in excessive of total profits that the farmer makes. Further to this, the admixture related to the gene flow cannot be associated to given source of pollution and cannot be easily traced back to a single source or definite source. Technically, this argument is in favor of ex ante regulation against the ex post regulation.


At the beginning of the last decade of the 20th century, heated debate attempted to compare GM foods and normal foods. Consequently, terms for instance, substantial equivalence was taken into context with intent to compare one production strategy against another. For this reason, the economic cooperation and development (OECD) commenced with a Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) provided an assessment framework that justified substantial equivalence in reference to the comparison between GM and the conventional counterpart in relation to nutritional context of allergenicity and toxicology. In both Europe and the U.S, comparison has been centered to examine the equivalency between counterparts of possible dimensions. According to a journal published by Science Direct (13-14) it is evident that nature of GM foods has been, scrutinized medically and normal plants have been applied to issue a competing comparison. Indeed, comparisons have extended to examine the impact of each plant into the normal life of an individual. Issues currently being investigated include; overall health, food consumption, body weight gain, food consumption, clinical pathology parameters, microscopic and appearance of tissues that each source of food exhibits on the consumers.


Although there are a tremendous number of testimonies by reputable scientist, and a significant amount of evidence attempting to justify the incoherent application of GMC, it should be noted that politics has played a crucial role in the development of the same. On one hand, biotech companies have constantly manipulated the law, applied the available loopholes and to some extent bought their way through government approval process. Backroom and front press politics have constantly taken center stage all funded by GM or rivaling GM companies. As such, there are numerous ethical and political difficulties in handling uncertain technologies.

According to (27) elected politicians, agree to share power if new patterning of democracy is achieved. This implies that politicians are not interested in the proper decision making process, but on triumphing against each in relation to the GMC. As a result, crucial issues surrounding GM foods are not addressed. Instead, politics tends to overtake central processes of GMC policy development. For example, in the U.S, there has been an impetus media campaign operated on behalf of the GM food companies to persuade American people and politicians that genetically modified foods does provide alternatives to a hungering America. However, as much as this campaign is gaining influence, the conservative politics has presented a realistic challenge for the same in recent times. In summary, GM foods are proving a reliable food option but politics are constraining the development of such a lucrative technology.


In addition to the summary presented above, it is positive to acknowledge the significant impact that GMC foods are contributing towards the development of several livelihoods. This choice of technology has also been responsible in contributing positively to the economy and reducing the food shortage gap. Further to this, the research advocates the usage of more coherent technology. For instance, Research and Development departments assigned to different jurisdictions should center their efforts in realizing a neutral provision of GMC. This calls for the combination of medical and agricultural departments to ensure that goals are realized in the shortest time possible.  In this case, technology should be centered in reducing belligerent issues associated with GMC, and this can replace with a collective methodology to mitigate concerns. Consequently, different jurisdictions should pursue politics mitigating policies, which do not foster belligerence against ambitious technology.

Work Cited

ARVANITOYANNIS, IOANNIS, and ARTEMIS DONA. “Health Risks of Genetically

Modified Foods.” Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 4. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 June 2014. .

Beacom, David. “Genetically Modified Crops.” Resources for Environmental Literacy. N.p., n.d.

Web. 23 June 2014. .

Best Food Facts. “Food for Thought – Nutrition: GM and Non-GM Foods? – Best Food Facts.”

Best Food Facts. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 June 2014. <

Economic Social Research Council. “The politics of GM food.” ESRC Global Environmental

Change Programme. N.p., 4 Oct. 1999. Web. 23 June 2014.

Elsevier. “Safety and nutritional assessment of GM plants and derived food and feed: The role of

animal feeding trials.” Report of the EFSA GMO Panel Working Group on Animal Feeding Trials. N.p., 9 Dec. 2007. Web. 23 June 2014.

Friends of the Earth. “Genetically modified crops and food .” Briefing. N.p., 22 Jan. 2003. Web.

23 June 2014. <>. “Safety Assessment of Genetically Modified Foods.” GM Foods. N.p., n.d. Web. 23

June 2014. <

“Genetically Modified Crops.” Breeding. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 June 2014.


Green Peace. “Environmental and health impacts of GM crops – the science .” Green Peace. N.p.,

10 Sept. 2011. Web. 23 May 2014. <>.

Khush, Gurdev. “Genetically modified crops: the fastest adopted crop technology in the history

of modern agriculture.” COMMENTARY. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 June 2014. <>.

Nader, Ralph. Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us!New York: Seven Stories Press, 2009. Internet


Romeis, Jörg, and Anthony M. Shelton. Integration of Insect-Resistant Genetically Modified

Crops Within Ipm Programs. Dordrecht: Springer, 2008. Print.

Wang, Mingcong, Maxim Kapralov, and Maria Anisimova. “Coevolution of amino acid residues

in the key photosynthetic enzyme Rubisco.” Research Article. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 June 2014. <>.

Wisconsin . “GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROPS.” Wisconsin . N.p., 5 Dec. 2012. Web. 23

June 2014. <


Readable Online Materials

Get Professional Assignment Help Cheaply

fast coursework help

Are you busy and do not have time to handle your assignment? Are you scared that your paper will not make the grade? Do you have responsibilities that may hinder you from turning in your assignment on time? Are you tired and can barely handle your assignment? Are your grades inconsistent?

Whichever your reason may is, it is valid! You can get professional academic help from our service at affordable rates. We have a team of professional academic writers who can handle all your assignments.

Our essay writers are graduates with diplomas, bachelor's, masters, Ph.D., and doctorate degrees in various subjects. The minimum requirement to be an essay writer with our essay writing service is to have a college diploma. When assigning your order, we match the paper subject with the area of specialization of the writer.

Why Choose Our Academic Writing Service?

  • Plagiarism free papers
  • Timely delivery
  • Any deadline
  • Skilled, Experienced Native English Writers
  • Subject-relevant academic writer
  • Adherence to paper instructions
  • Ability to tackle bulk assignments
  • Reasonable prices
  • 24/7 Customer Support
  • Get superb grades consistently

How It Works

1.      Place an order

You fill all the paper instructions in the order form. Make sure you include all the helpful materials so that our academic writers can deliver the perfect paper. It will also help to eliminate unnecessary revisions.

2.      Pay for the order

Proceed to pay for the paper so that it can be assigned to one of our expert academic writers. The paper subject is matched with the writer’s area of specialization.

3.      Track the progress

You communicate with the writer and know about the progress of the paper. The client can ask the writer for drafts of the paper. The client can upload extra material and include additional instructions from the lecturer. Receive a paper.

4.      Download the paper

The paper is sent to your email and uploaded to your personal account. You also get a plagiarism report attached to your paper.



order custom essay paper

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *