Looking through the science articles in the news papers many things keep coming up. What I keep seeing is genetically altered food. The biggest story that hit email this week was about making the perfect burger, this dish that will cost $325,000. This is not only a case that is controversial with in the United States, this burger article takes place in the Netherlands and has to do with the United Kingdom. Yet within the United States the fight about food rages on. Though the issue on food has not been at the fore front of the news lately it is very much with in the secondary tear, as I like to call it.
This issue comes up over and over again, in so many different ways, PETA will argue and lobby for animal rights, even going as far as to advocate that meat should not be served as food. Yet, the scientific solution to that opinion would clearly be artificially growing meat in a lab, where it may not even take animals to make it. On the other hand, this means that many chemicals and preservatives and additives would have to be added to make sure the food will last, and will taste similar to what people are used to. With that, many people also are against chemical additives in there food, which also includes pesticides. This is also a very valid point in my opinion since there isn't much research of the long term effects that the genetically altered food can have on us.
With that this issue seems to be nothing less the a double edged sword. There is no solution that will please all parties, and with that in mind there is not much room for compromise, if there is any at all, so where does this leave us. It leaves us all very split on the issue, with out coming to a conclusion. Each side of this issue seems to feel so strongly about there opinions and stance on the issues that there is really no way to even really talk about the issue. If the news has shown me anything it just seems like each side is just doing there own thing to try and prove there way is better rather then having someone very scientifically compare and contrast both side and decide what is useful, safe and helpful from both sides. Will we ever be able to agree on what food should be, most likely not, but the battle rages on.
"Engineering the $325,000 In-Vitro Burger - NYTimes.com." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2013. <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/14/science/engineering-the-325000-in-vitro-burger.html?ref=science>.
" People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA): The animal rights organization | PETA.org." People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA): The animal rights organization | PETA.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2013. <http://www.peta.org/>.
"Genetically engineered foods: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia."National Library of Medicine - National Institutes of Health. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2013. <http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency
2 comments:
Interesting post.....I think there are many issues including this one that people cannot agree on. However, genetically altered food sounds good for the purposes of weening out disease and imperfection but I see your point also.
Interesting topic for a point and it something that effects everyone. This highlights the point that anything can become political. I agree I think if both sides are that charged why not do the scientific research to add to their case. Also no matter what political decision is made on any topic you will not please everyone.
Post a Comment