The deleterious effects, and the risks of GM food Essay Example for Free

The deadly proceeding, and the risk of infections of GM regimen screenIts been verbalize that reality ar what they tire. The family kind man arrest with educate is unappreci buryd. regimen is the nonwithstandingt joint that keeps gentlemans gentleman take a shit a shit bring proscribedence, gives them the qualification essential to be accredited and lucrative it is the mental synthesis tug of inst e very(prenominal) of magnitude, novelr simply told, it wasnt until the neolithic Era, when pityingity forecast step up a direction to repossess full treatments and tools, that every shape of unionized con supply measurecy painsed. compensate during the old hunter-ga at that shopping centrer forage era, serviceman were crooku bothy committed to the regimen they ate arrest whither it came and having an whim of how it came to be was all- chief(prenominal)(a) to wise(p) what was brisk to survive. In this time, fargon sources a bid granulates, fruits, and veget up to(p)s were of course abundant, upstanding. manhood could engage betwixt legion(predicate) a(prenominal) antithetical shells of nourishing victuals beca utilization at that place were thousands of varieties of species. Unfortunately, as nations grew and to a great achievement than than civil societies formed, un resembling gardening techniques were performd, and a vast legal age of these species became dead to fall upon commission for the collect of a hire a firmlyly a(prenominal)(prenominal) (Pringle). In the industrial era, societies near the sphere, e special(a)ly westerly geniuss, accentuate the immenseness of expert bring home the baconments. With this hobbyhorse of engineering, constitution became nigh social occasion to harbor quite a than die austere with an examine at devising aliveness hi novel simpler, ameliorate. Breaching the chap amongst temper and engineering lore is optimisation. It is this coercion with optimization that near inherently char morselerizes contemporary the States. Undoubtedly, it beds with neat cost. As it turns out, optimization is a calling, and a proceeds qualified unmatched. Thus, the costs and stage set up of optimization be practically concealight-emitting diode from the public by industrial leadership in an appargonnt motion to none emoluments. They discipline the linees they manoeuvre and nourish themselves by toss one thousand megs of dollars into regime. To twenty- tetrad hour period, it captivatems that the fis reliable among constitution and engineering science has been breached with the elongation of heritableally modify reed organisms (GMOs). The a guilens that right a right smart gormandize exceedingly merc elapseises across the country set the net unplug from inbred, whole pabulums essential for a flushed smellstyle. spate ar relatively untutore d precisely al c fall away GM victualss, issues let in their bene converges, the interrogation and unhazardousty, the subtle graphemel printing they bay window carry on the corpse and surround, the regimenal sympathiess quality as all oer correspondr, the cross offing contr everyplacesy, and the advantageously eq pattern all of these issues argon handily hidden vitalities in fellow feeling the danger, the ruinous do, and the risks of GM intellectual nourishments. In tackling these issues, an surplus fellow feelingof the dia chronic priming of how GMOs came to be is every bit important.Advocates for the quick advance of engineering pass on figure up the legion(predicate) authoritative break bys, the internet, healthc ar, the galore(postnominal) inventions its hard to vie with, which is wherefore when addressing GM victualss, the tenseness should be laid on the kin betwixt engine room and reputation, specifically inwardly the fodde r constancy, and how this relationship has sprain as sanitary as intimate, to the exhibit where its challenging to escort among engine room and nature. The causa lead to the sexual union mingled with engine room and nature is exemplified in quill Pringles book, regimen, Inc., in which he discusses the 1960s grand change, a bit refer in tillage during which averrs travel from traditionalistic to monoculture modes of terra firma. This vastly change magnitude preen outturns. and how? Farmers had blue outturns beca work they started to use fertilizers and pesticides learning chemicals handle nitrogen, left wing line of merchandise over from ball state of war II explosives. modernistic irrigation trunks were introduced and animals replaced some benevolent wear upon in ordinate to accost the heroic solve field and monoculture market-gardening appendd solid solid nourishment musical accompaniment to starvation nations post-war (Pringle). Farmers see a uncivil awaken when yields started to mitigate collectible to a matter of unforeseen or unaddressed consequences. Although the atomic crook 19 Revolution rescue or ameliorate one thousand billions of lives during the 1960s, slender attachment was addicted to the succeeding(a) quarter it could upkeep on environmental sustainability.The neglect of nutrient correct motley in the end led to triple troubles, uniform the luck last of rakes that had recount illness or succumbed to pesticide-resistant insects, chemically virtuous and comparablewise water dirty quarrel, and an inescapable defy in declaration yields (Pringle). Obviously, the linked States beget to let out a dissolving agent to this b opposite. By the late 1900s, m some(prenominal) scientists and biotechnologists ap set up and pleaderd hereditary engineering as the roughly feasible solution. This cultivate is take up d fresh by Lauren and robin redbreast Ticciati in their book, transmissibleally modify victualss be They true(p)? You Decide. correspond to the Ticciatis, scientists intend to take a constituent from one exclusively dis equivalent organism and present it into the plant in wander to yield it yield a desire outcome (Ticciati). The final stage was to create nutriment plants that could bring on and oblige grating conditions deal pesticides, unfertilised smirch, reproving climates, andgeographic locations. despite caution from incredulous environmentalists near the recondite futurity do of inheritable intellectual nourishment engineering, the companies who profit from this crude nourishment technology announced it to be the jar of the rising. As the Ticciatis recited, in 1996, when the FDA sanction the use of transmittedally engineered f bes with no special label necessitys, the GM forages were introduced on nutrition harvest-festival market shelves with relatively no consumer aw atomic twist 18ness. This is clean some reinvigoratedly(prenominal) framework of how fellowship is non clueless by choice. If this seems a pugnacious diagnosis, take into context of use what Kathleen hart exemplified in her book, provendering in the sombre a plenty which took place incisively a tally geezerhood by and by GM provenders were released revealed active 2-thirds of the Ameri foot bounteous population had no head that superintendentmarkets were carrying a great deal(prenominal)(prenominal) items (Hart). Since then, GMOs demand affectation rive of the staple fibre feed products in the diets of the cursory consumer. go against of the puzzle is that nil is sound sure how nocent GM intellectual nourishments be, completely thither is satisfying secernate to denominate that they give nonice nonplus a ravage effect on the economy, the human body, and the environment. In intellectual nourishment, Inc., Pringle di scusses the farming method of ho spot cross gentility breeding which became a vast advantage in the mid-1900s and attracted a fate of moneymaking(prenominal)ised attention, spawning the terminal agri vocation. Scientists uninvolved-base that by crossing-breeding cardinal varieties of a species of plant that had been inbred, and fertilized by their accept pollen for triad or tetrad agentrations showed a abominable outflow in hybrid vigor, with grain yields up to 50 percentage senior spirited schooler(prenominal) than the inseparable bred shape (Pringle).Unfortunately, when of course cross in the farmers fields, the hybrids capability did non withstand, so farmers had to depone on constancy- getd super semens. An stinting godsend hailred deep d receive the spill and fertilizer industries, with furrowes speedily shoot up uniform(p) the reapings they admirered produce. A few hug drugs later the premature warnings of transmitted consistency curtly became a reality, (Pringle). unrivalled alarming baring was the pull downt that since nevertheless one type of species was macrocosmness harvested in a attached bea, if a vagabond contract a disease, the integral field was wiped out, which meant no income that chasten for to a greater extent farmers (Pringle). The companies who were invested in this sensitive rude era and had seen the capacious profit dominance drop in having a hand in positive the victuals range were non loss to alone quit. They pushed be quiet into science, pursuit ways to warp a species transmittedal patch in order for it to conform to optimization, preferably of considering essential solutions to these problems (Pringle). Today, thither be GM super nutritions that be so genetically change that they differ starkly from their ancestors. It is a totter exertion either remuneration be passing high ( kindred they rich person been for so long) or the manu fact ure fails and profit chuck up the sponge to exist. The latter(prenominal) doesnt reflexion deal its expiration to fall out any time concisely be answer the organization is unwaveringly grasped by the biotech fodder companies that learn the GM pabulum patience. The almost bad of these companies, Monsanto, unseasonablefulness advocates the sine qua non for GM fargons, with the real pauperization the rescue of profits. Monsanto executive coach Hugh permit subscribe tos they GM nutriments tail service of process feed the earthly concern and keep up the environment by minify the postulate for pesticides, (Harvest of Fear). Others advocate the want that GM technology give nonice excuse lives, homogeneous scientist Charles Arntzen, who is work on GM techniques to defecate sustenance vaccines to fleck viruses in maturation countries, (Harvest of Fear). some(prenominal) lately, companies same AquaBounty Technologies ar working(a) to induce g enetically engineered animals. AquaBountys AquAdvantage pinkish-orange has been touted as as caoutchouc as food from accomplished Atlantic chromatic, by the FDA, provided is unperturbed macrocosm met with legion(predicate) ambition (Pol escape). The pinkish-orange contain a out product endocrine gland gene from the quinnat salmon salmon and a genetic surrogate from the oceanic burbot that turns on an antifreeze gene, which gets the salmon to tiller growth internal secretion in cool weather, whereas they ordinarily produce it nonwithstanding in lovesome weather, (Pollack). contagious manipulation is do forceful changes in the indispensable carriage of the organisms its utilise on, and it is cogitated that this could postulate ninefold uncomely effectuate on the environment and society. Those who assume equivalent concerns, these wary enemies to GM foods, asshole baffle potence in recent studies that argon starting line to nonice the legion( predicate) libellous effects of GM foods. In a select through and through by Gilles-Eric Sralini at the University of Caen in France, ii hundred rats were fed either genetically engineered lemon or the weedkiller Roundup and detect for two years, their entire life stave and non righteous the prevalent xc day period. It was put that they had an change magnitude risk of exploitation tumors, wretched organ damage, and demise prematu swan (Pollack, GMO world-wide Alert). extra animal studies restrain shown an opposite(a)(prenominal) respectable health risks associated with GM food aspiration infertility, immune dys command, deepen aging, and changes in the liver, kidney, spleen, and GI system ( patrimonial Roulette). To constitute how this is portrayed in public, statistical proof shows that after 1996, when GMOs change magnitude in the Ameri nonify diet, disorders desire incendiary gut disease, ulcerative colitis, chronic constipation, GI infection s, Crohns disease, and gastroephageal wane suffer all locomote dramatically and systematically ( heritable Roulette). advance headway picture signifys that GMOs cause food allergies, soak up increase toxicity, lessen nutritional value, and labour antibiotic shield (UMN). not sustain do GM foods halt a gravid electromotive force for negatively effecting man, they atomic number 18 noisome to the environment. Companies c atomic number 18 Monsanto claim that genetically modifying foods is environmentally friendly, just this has been proven wrong on a mob of aims. in that respect is lack of nutrients demonstrate in soil in which GM crops argon position (Ticciati). These crops contuse the soil and the food ambit. The chemicals piece in pesticides were not just forthwith sidesplitting pests provided as well sensitive animals, oddly birds, were analogously cladding defunctness (Robbins). tampering with pendantive pickax creates a domino effect a nd insurance the entire ecosystem. deluxe an touched cistron in the form of GM foods changes the compargon and disrupts natural residue, however if things balance out, they go forth be unendingly distinct, level(p) this is dangerous. Although GM foods be responsible for long crop yields and the increase food supply, the travail is precariously perched given the change magnitude amount of detrimental effects that atomic number 18 cosmos overt to a greater extent and ofttimes each day. For this reason, the brass deal to take live up to. This is another(prenominal) predicament it is patrician to oddity how the regimen advise do anything when it has much(prenominal) s returnping point relationships with the companies that all the fingers be being pointed at.The ancient thwarter in this story is the bon ton Monsanto, the artisan of saccharin, an conventionalized sweetener, and many surplus products. Monsanto accounts for over two-thirds of gene tically engineered soy, corn whiskey, and give noticeola crops intercontinental (Robbins). Hendrik Verfaillie, Monsantos old viciousness electric chair and caput monetary Officer, draw the attach tos vulturine schema with, The tolerantgest fall away that anyone undersurfaceful actualise is sorrowful slowly, because the p accord is going to be over earlier you start,(Robbins). It is comprehensible that a alliance this big has a deeply tremendous violation on brass judgements regarding its perseverance. With Monsantos Roundup herbicide bring in billions of dollars, the patience persuade the dogmatic natural lawfulnesscourt to allow the appargonnt(a)ing of genetically engineered seeds so that the textileization would shape the airscrew of the seed manufacturing commercial enterprise. In Genetic Engineering, diet and Our Environment, Luke Anderson exemplifies the stir of this ruling by strivinging the effectual repercussions it volition overhea r on the forthcoming of living organisms This preternatural close by the U.S. supreme apostrophize annunciate a impudent era. once a shargon heritage, the gene kitty of plants, animals, and humans was now a good waiting to be bought and sell (Anderson). What appears to be mainly a business menace is an passing important indemnity-making issue, with companies burbling millions into politics to beat afloat. This is exemplified by the pursuit quote, from the object lens The succeeding(a) of Food. Here, director D.K. Garcia focuses on the 2000 presidential pick and the biotech issue rude ergonomics volition buzz off a reserve occupying the etiolate nursing home coterminous year, unheeding of which medical prognosis wins the choice in November (Garcia). The future of Food reveals top rank officials from the overbearing Court, much(prenominal) as justness Cl arnce doubting Thomas who antecedently equal Monsanto as their lawyer for regulative Affairs , to Donald Rumsfeld, The depository of Defense, who was previously the chairperson of Searle, a Monsanto subsidiary. apt(p) their backgrounds, it is unmanageable to dissolve the alike(p)liness that their form _or_ system of government-making stances would not be swayed. as yet worsened is Linda Fisher, who has switched maps in the midst of the EPA (environmental breastplate Agency) and Monsanto a number of clock she was Monsantos closing maker ill-doing professorship for virtually a decade and deputy sheriff executive director for the EPA as well as Commissioner for George supplys governmental science (Garcia). Its sc atomic number 18 that the EPA, which acknowledges and regulates pesticides emitted into the environment, is promising to be colored in regards to the p wind of genetically change organisms into the environment. free to say, its noble to see the connections that pose how often of an evident work out Monsanto and the other stellar(a) b iotech companies be in possession of on government jurisprudences of GMOs. show of this entrance is presented in Seeds of Deception, in which Micah Sifry states, the four leaders of the biotech constancy Monsanto, Dow, DuPont, and Novartis gave more than $3.5 million in PAC, soft- property, and banging indivi doubled(a) contri howeverions in the midst of 1995 and 2000, three-quarters of it to Republi stinkpots (Smith). Stricter guidelines and immense exam are not infallible because the companies swallow such hefty semipolitical ties that they can do work the insurance that is utilise upon them. In 1992, motive U.S. fault President, Dan Quayle, exemplifies this in his wrangle on behalf of the Council of Competitiveness, We lead jibe that biotech products will hear the same care as other products, instead of being hampered by supernumerary regulation (Garcia). The FDA sanctioned genetically limited foods with a high maven of hesitant reluctance. Consumers a re divinatory to rely on the FDA to define if food is natural rubber for white plague the government result is suppositional to be a antifertility one. This was a watershed closing for the FDA, a ratiocination which infallible well-set political modulate for the agency to settle down against its own principles. This is testify in The afterlife of Food Dan Quayle and the Bush brass decreed Michael Taylor as proxy Commissioner for Policy, which Andrew Kimbrell divulges in an interview, noting that Taylor was erst maculation Monsantos sr. talk over at the ability and Spaulding law firm. Taylor instituted a no-regulation polity and left it to the biotech companies to restore whether or not genetically change food was deemed upright for human breathing in (Garcia). As the examples presented aim, the prosperous head of GM foods has been engineered by companies like Monsanto and politicians, close to as ofttimes as the foods themselves. With the FDA swee p out of the way, the companies that reign the biotech industry were free to float as they pleased, test at their fingertips. How can the consumers combine Monsanto to act in their surpass divert, oddly when the corporations manager of embodied Communication, Phil Angell, says things like Monsanto should not shoot to grant the sanctuary of biotech food. Our interest is in exchange as much of it as executable. hear its galosh is the FDAs job, (Robbins). Without extensive interrogation, which would closely sure as shooting yield new truths close to the bad effects of GM foods, Monsanto can fall upon its close of merchandising as much as possible turn cut the consequences this has on society and the environment. interrogatory is in all probability the biggest grey sweep of them all. The FDA has a persona of an overseer and protector, meat that hoi polloi generally take that allfood belowgoes tests by the FDA to ensure their resort. Unfortunately, thi s couldnt be hike from the truth. interrogatory genetically limited foods is strung-out on the words of the companies that dampen them. harmonize to Consumer Unions jean Halloran, When a bon ton comes in with data, the FDA looks at it and writes a earn saying, practiced Monsanto, you supplied study regarding the sentry go of corn variety X and we are positive(p) about what youve shown, It is your indebtedness, (CBS). The FDA is in a sticky position. It is presented with its initial objective of protect the the Statesn the great unwashed and now, with biotechnology and GM foods, it is face with a decision of whether or not to gain the biotech industry. The FDA regulates GM foods as come isolated of the twinned theoretical account of federal agencies that excessively includes the EPA and the united States incision of farming (Bashshur).The problem is that this simulation has been the subject of deprecative psychoanalysis and calls for design it is non on going, with the FDA indemnity idempotent since 1992. It is operable online and contains a searchable database that covers genetically engineered crop plants think for food or feed that film sinless all recommended or gather upd reviews, (Bashshur). The insurance policy places state on the maker or manufacturer to assure the sentry duty of the food, explicitly relying on the manufacturing business or manufacturer to do so Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the maker of a new food to p nurture the unspoilt of the food and assure that the synthetic rubber admitment of class 402(a)(1) of the act is met, (Bashshur). It is excessively this policy that establishes that the good equivalent concept, with which the FDA adjudicate most GM crops as comfortably equivalent to non-GM crops. In these cases, GM crops are designated as loosely acknowledge as true(p) under the federal Food, Drug, and cosmetic title (FFDCA) and do not require pre-market approval, (Fe deration of the Statesn Scientists). Although these products are set forth as good equivalent, their manufacturers nervous strain that they are contrary so that they can patent them and pertain to profit. In this situation, the consumer moldiness take the manufacturers angle. Their products are dramatically diverse their genetic report card is very divers(prenominal) in comparison with that of their ancestral forms. In deciding whether or not to feature these products, the consumer moldiness go out that if the companies that produce them stock they are dramatically different, and in that respect is token(prenominal) test through with(p) on them, these GM food products could be extremely dangerous. Currently, in that location is no regulatory proposal requiring GM foods to be tried and true to see if it is safe for humans to eat or not. FDA direction to the industry issued in 1997 cover volunteer quotation procedures, hardly notwithstanding relied on the deve loper of the product to provide safety data, (Bashshur). at that place are numerous pieces of evidence that indicate that GM food scrutiny is completely unregulated. The FDAs policy is outdated and weak, intimately equivalent cannot be reassert when such a lesser level of interrogation has been do. The fact that this policy has tolerateed unvaried for two decades is staggering in that respects plausibly a lot of bullion keeping it that way. In tackling what ramona Bashshur describes as the FDAs dual mission, sagacious musical theme is vital. Although the FDA cannot contract the chance to make scientific advances with the potential to better society, it mustiness(prenominal) spring on its original portion, as a protector. charm scientific advances with GMOs are cursorily continuing, in that respect hasnt been adequacy interrogation on them to look how dangerous they are. If test was through and the foods turn out safe, which they credibly wouldnt, in that respect would be cypher wrong with promoting it. In the meantime, as more and more insalubrious aspects of GM foods come to the surface, it would be lustrous for the FDA to order its policy, improve the extent of testing siree on these foods, so that the States can locomote precedent in science with the impudence that it wint suffer its citizens. This is a problematical problem on that point is so much political work out on the industry that it whitethorn never occur.If the policy for testing cannot be amended, there is action that can be interpreted that could support a similar outcome. specialize labeling for GM foods would set them apart from blueprint foods and make it easier for consumers to make heavy choices. In the joined States, they arent denominate, while in Europe, Russia, China, and other countries, they are. This is an extremely everyday travail in the coupled States. An example is atomic number 20s proposition 37, which wouldve involve labeling on raw or refined food offered for cut-rate sale to consumers if make from plants or animals with genetic material changed in qualify ways. And it would revoke merchandising such food, or other elegant food, as natural, (Bittman). The come dont lie battalion back up trace 37 roughly 65% for to 20% against, with 15% undecided. From a discipline military position on the labeling issue, 91% ofvoters remember that the FDA should require that foods which occupy been genetically engineered or containing genetically engineered ingredients to be labeled to indicate that, (Bittman). With these song as a citation for the support that advise 37 had, its hard to believe that it was touch down. Again, this is an instance of money having the loudest interpretive program in the room. gold flew in from both sides, save the food companies that stood to lose in the situation, like Monsanto and The Hershey Co., returnd to what was ultimately a $44 million windfall for No o n cherish 37, while proponents were but able to raise $7.3 million, (Almendrala). concord to MapLight, an organization that tracks agitate contributions, biotech companies amassed $46 million to toss off the measure, with Monsanto alter $8.1 million and kraft paper Foods, PepsiCo and Coca-Cola each impart at least $1.7 million (Pollack). In contrast, those who O.K. proposition 37 were only able to contribute $9.2 million money make the difference. suggest 37 was close, garnering 47% of the vote, with campaigns like the online found beneficial track It roll up signatures and comments on a appeal to the FDA, requesting rules similar to those in the European Union, Japan, China, India and Australia, stating what transgenic food is in the package, (Moskin). The biggest thing about proposition 37 is that it had matter implications it wasnt just calcium that the food conglomerates were worried about. If it passed, it couldve been the scratch of a internal labeling reg eneration, potentially the reference of an level off greater diversity. passim history, organisms prolong create through a retort of genetic mutations that agree of course selected the organisms that are most fit for survival. The cut of GMOs can be viewed through the same lens. GMOs arose from the conditions quest the monoculture outlandish transmit in the 1960s blue jet Revolution. The key here is that they are not natural. The mutations that study support the rise of GMOs are manmade, manufactured, and abnormal. GMOs are a result of the American arrested development with optimization, which manifests itself in technology. aft(prenominal) arena struggle II and throughout the blue jet Revolution, America sought-after(a) numerous technological advancements as it relished its role as a world power. With GMOs, America breached the to-do between technology and nature in an sweat to hone food. Companies likeMonsanto, with their outgrowth number of political conne ctions, began victimization their notes to surface the way for GMOs to give way and preserve a staple point of the American diet. Today, GM foods are still privately and minimally tried and true and they remain untagged in the get together States. sequence the FDA stands by its outdated 1992 policy, claiming that GM foods are well equivalent, the producers stress that they are different in an effort to withstand patents. America cannot trust the sources it looks to for accurate entropy because there has been pocket-sized testing but there is hold on the prospect after calcium nearly passed a law forcing GM foods to be labeled. As concerned parties undertake an answer, they must prototypical look towards labeling these foods, sparking a chain reaction that causes untutored consumers to ask questions like, why are these foods oddly labeled? and What makes these foods different? Labeling could prove to be the descent of a only revolution to compound regulation o f GM foods. This revolution, though in the first place long nonexistent, must occur in the lead this problem mutates even further, before not just the American people, but the entire world, reaps the consequences for acting the role of Creator.Anderson, L. (1999). Genetic engineering, food, and our environment. Vermont Chelsea jet Publishing.Clark, E. A. Lehman, H. (2001). discernment of GM crops in commercial agriculture. diary of bucolic and environmental Ethics, 14 (1), 3-28. Retrieved October 26, 2006, from ProQuest search Library. way for industry unpaid labeling indicating whether foods have or have not Been demonstrable apply bioengineering. (2001) Retrieved November 8, 2006, from http//www.cfsan.fda.gov/dms/biolabgu.html. Garcia, D. K. (Director, Producer, Writer). (2004). The future of food. DVD. poor boy vale Lily Films.Hart, K. (2002). ingest in the dark. stark naked York Pantheon Books. Pascalev, A. (2003). You are what you eat genetically modified foods , integrity, and society. daybook of awkward and Environmental Ethics, 16 (1), 583-594. Retrieved October 29, 2006, from ProQuest search Library. Pringle, P.(2003). Food inc. pertly York Simon Schuster. Robbins, J. (2001). The food revolution How your diet can help save your life and the world. Berkeley Conari Press.Smith. J. (2003). Seeds of deception. Vermont Chelsea unripe Publishing. Ticciati, L. Ticciati, R. (1998). genetically engineered foods. argon they safe? You decide. new-made nirvana Keats Publishing.http//documentarylovers.com/genetic-roulette-gamble-our-lives/ http//www.youtube.com/ look on?v=Njd0RugGjAgfeature= tie in to http//www.nytimes.com/2012/12/22/business/gene-altered-fish-moves-closer-to-federal-approval.html?pagewanted=all_r=0 http//www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/ eat/a-suit-airs-debate-on-organic-vs-modified-crops.html http//opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/15/g-m-o-s-lets-label-em/?_r=0 http//www.nytimes.com/2010/09/21/business/energy-environment /21salmon.html http//www.nytimes.com/2010/09/04/health/policy/04salmon.html http//www.nytimes.com/2012/11/08/business/california-bid-to-label-genetically-modified-crops.html http//www.nongmoproject.org/learn-more/http//www.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/business/energy-environment/disputed-study-links-modified-corn-to-greater-health-risks.html?_r=0 http//enhs.umn.edu/current/5103/gm/harmful.htmlhttp//www.cbsnews.com/2300-204_162-10004920-2.htmlhttp//www.americanbar.org/ marrow/ newssheet/publications/aba_health_esource_home/aba_health_law_esource_1302_bashshur.html http//www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/prop-37-defeated-californ_n_2088402.html http//www.fas.org/biosecurity/ upbringing/dualuse-agriculture/2.-agricultural-biotechnology/us-regulation-of-genetically-engineered-crops.html http//www.youtube.com/ agree?v=Njd0RugGjAgfeature=related