Initially I was confused by Mr. Tyson’s comments, but with his explanation, I understand and agree with most of what he says. Altho all “natural” foods may have been modified, they are far from equal. A farmer who selectively breeds an apple to be bigger, or watermelon to have fewer seeds, is completely different from a company that splices DNA from bacteria or alga into a plant to create a desired result. That being said, I am not against genetic manipulation of plants or organisms. There is the potential for some long range problems, but with proper testing, I believe the benefits outweigh the potential threat. My main difference with Mr. Tyson is in labeling. Most GMO produce is not altered to be more nutritious or better, it is altered to produce its own pesticides or be more pesticide resistant. That may be beneficial to the farmer and fantastic for the pesticide company. It is definitely not beneficial to the consumer. Proper labeling must be available to protect the consumer. Whether its animals that are injected with growth hormones or antibiotics, or produce that can withstand pesticide and chemical levels that would kill a normal plant. As consumers we have the right to know what has been done to the product we are purchasing to feed our family’s.
Posted on: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 23:55:05 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015