The Instigator
Lauren_k
Pro (for)
Winning
13 Points
The Contender
Tuxido_night
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Genetically Modified Organisms are unsafe for people and the environment.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
Lauren_k
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/1/2012 Category: Health
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,547 times Debate No: 20817
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (4)

 

Lauren_k

Pro

I am for the banning of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO's), as they are unsafe for human consumption and the threaten our environment.

1st round: Acceptance.

2nd, and 3rd round 4th round: Arguments and rebuttal.

5th round: Conclusion and summary
Tuxido_night

Con

I accept the debate
Debate Round No. 1
Lauren_k

Pro

One thing we can all agree on is that no one wakes up in the morning eager to buy gene-altered food. Genetically modified foods (GMO's) do nothing for the public. They provide no extra nutrition, flavor, safety or any other trait that people would want. [7] Instead, these food products only offer risks, which include potential toxicity, allergy reactions, and lower nutritional value. [7] GMO's do more harm than good for humans and our environment. On top of that they are not required to be labeled, so if you want to avoid GMO's , you're out of luck. I will outline major reasons why this practice is a huge threat to our health and the world.

1. UNTESTED : Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are one of�the most dangerous and radical changes�to our food supply. [1] These largely unregulated ingredients are found in 60-70% of the foods in the US.
Many consumers believe that the FDA approves GM foods through rigorous, in-depth, long-term studies. [1] The scary fact is that there are no safety testing requirements. Instead the agency relies on research from companies like Monsanto.

2. CORRUPTION : So why do we have all these farms, and why is our food made with GMO's if it is so bad? That can't happen, right? Wrong. Monsanto has made us the unknowing guinea pigs for foods that make them a lot of money and offer us nothing but risk. [7] Monsanto's research is meticulously designed to avoid finding problems, helping their company, but threatening the public. [1] Monsanto was declared the worst company of 2011 by Natural Society for threatening both human health and the environment. [2] Monsanto is currently responsible for 90 percent of the genetically engineered seed on the United States market. [2] Before the FDA decided to allow GMOs into food without labeling, FDA scientists had repeatedly warned that GM foods can create unpredictable, hard-to-detect side effects, including allergies, toxins, new diseases, and nutritional problems. [3] They urged long-term safety studies, but were ignored. This is concerning news for the people who most likely unknowingly eating this food on a daily basis.

3. RESEARCH/HIDDEN DANGERS : Unlike safety evaluations for drugs, there are no human clinical trials of GM foods. [3] They was one Human feeding experiment, which revealed that the genetic material inserted into GM soy transfers into bacteria living inside our intestines continues to function well after the fact. [3] This means that long after we stop eating GM foods, we may still have their proteins inside us. This could mean:
*If the antibiotic gene stays in our bodies, it can create super diseases, resistant to antibiotics. [3]
*If the gene that creates Bt-toxin in GM corn were to transfer, it might turn our intestinal bacteria into living pesticide factories. [3]
What's even sadder is that humans are the guinea pigs of what will come out of eating GM foods for decades. Many of our upcoming generations are eating it from birth. It has been proven that GMO foods pose a higher risk for children, as their little bodies are more susceptible to these harmful effects. [6]

There are countless documented research showing dangerous affects on the human body.
Genetically Modified Soy Linked to Sterility, Infant Mortality [4] The study showed that after feeding hamsters for two years over three generations, those on the GM diet, showed devastating results. By the third generation, GM fed hamsters lost the ability to have babies. They suffered slower growth, and a high mortality rate among the pups.

4. MASSIVE PESTICIDE POLLUTION : GM crops are a major reason for the massive expansion of pesticide use in recent years. [7] The most famous and dangerous one is called Roundup which dramatically increased in use, and caused a growing epidemic of resistant weeds, which now infest millions of acres of America's cropland. [7] Pesticides cause a variety of health problems, pollute our waters, food, air, and threaten natural wildlife.

5. CROSS-BREEDING : Cross-breeding is guaranteed with GM alfalfa and corn. [1] (The U.S.D.A. claims to be figuring out ways to avoid this happening, but by then the damage may already be done.) [1] This is threatening food that is meant to be organic. The organic dairy industry is going to suffer immediate and frightening losses when G.E. alfalfa is widely grown, since many dairy cows eat dried alfalfa (hay), and the contamination of organic alfalfa means the milk of animals fed with that hay can no longer be called organic. [1] These GMO seeds will end up contaminating the food supply, and if years down the road there is severe epidemic problems, it will be too late to reverse. Are we ready to take that chance? I'm here to state that no, we aren't, and should not support GMO foods.

The only way to stop GMO contamination is to stop growing GMOs's.

Resources
http://www.seedsofdeception.com...[1]
http://naturalsociety.com... [2]
http://www.responsibletechnology.org...[3]
http://www.responsibletechnology.org... [4]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com... [5]
http://www.seedsofdeception.com... [6]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com... [7]
Tuxido_night

Con

Hi
1)UNTESTED? Well they are tested and tested a lot just explain me how in the world you would know that unregulated ingredients are found in 60-70% of the foods in the US? I mean is illogical to have this information if they are untested is paradox, and there are thousands of studies on them if something is going wrong is not the fault of studies is fault of your government that this kind of things happen, in fact these are just some studies about them
http://www.biotehnologii.usamv.ro...
http://www.ingentaconnect.com...
http://www.scielo.cl...

2)Corruption: well when you mention that GMO food is bad for the human, well if we humans do this things is because we want to improve the aliments not to cause a damage making the food stronger to disease, in the strict sense we are organism and now days are plenty of studies about genetic and these ones have resulted a benefit for those ones who have genetic disease, could you imagine the life knowing the gene code? Maybe perfect. Anyway you mention corruption but is a disadvantage of the government not of the GMO food and is something easily to correct with a good government and corruption is everywhere in laws but we are not to abolish them because the laws don't work; we have to make them work. Also I have to say that there are more enterprises than "MONSATO"
3)RESEARCH/HIDDEN DANGERS? Another paradox if they are so hidden how do you know? And I would say this again we do GMO food to improve it is like a conservative, also its true that it can cause damage but the sun can cause damage and you can�t turn it off, the contamination can cause damage and you can't stop it, the water is getting every day worse and you can�t do anything and like this are millions of thing but GMO food have to pass several test which are prove of their security and if this don't work is responsibility of your government I mean that "Monsanto" was fault of the government, in fact if they are not as secure as they say they would have great problems could you imagine the economic losses for them, if the people get ill they can be defendants.
4)MASSIVE PESTICIDE POLLUTION? Some environmentalists feel that GM crops help the environment because they reduce the need for pesticides. Every year, farmers spray 970 million tons of chemicals on plants. This has a significant effect on the environment. For people like cotton farmers, GM crops mean only having to spray chemicals one or two times instead of nine times, decreasing the negative effect of pesticides on the environment. GM crops could even help to clean up the environment (this process of using plants to clean up the earth is called phytoremediation). For example, poplar trees have been modified to clean up heavy metal pollution.
5)CROSS-BREEDING: the problem that you mention can be solve easily because the organic enterprises (which nowadays are not very common) can change easily having great incomes not just for them also for their country

The benefits
Genetically altered foods can also be manipulated to carry vitamins, minerals, and proteins that they otherwise would not have, increasing their healthiness. For example, many plants can be altered so that they have fewer calories and more fiber or starch. Many also have lower levels of pesticides, herbicides, and toxins than traditional plants because farmers don't need to spray them with chemicals and insects aren't able to release toxin into them. GM crops can help people in third-world countries by increasing nutritional value. "Golden rice" is one of the best examples of this. This GM rice stimulates the body to make Vitamin A and its goal is to prevent 2 million children from dying and another 500,000 from going blind because of lack of vitamin A.
GM crops can also carry medicines and vaccines to parts of the world where it is currently too costly to store and prepare them. Genetically altered foods also harbor a hope that 600 million people around the world won't have to go hungry every day, because crops will be plentiful enough to feed them.
• Pest resistance Crop losses from insect pests can be staggering, resulting in devastating financial loss for farmers and starvation in developing countries. Farmers typically use many tons of chemical pesticides annually.
• Herbicide tolerance For some crops, it is not cost-effective to remove weeds by physical means such as tilling, so farmers will often spray large quantities of different herbicides (weed-killer) to destroy weeds, a time-consuming and expensive process, that requires care so that the herbicide doesn't harm the crop plant or the environment. Crop plants genetically-engineered to be resistant to one very powerful herbicide could help prevent environmental damage by reducing the amount of herbicides needed.
• Disease resistance There are many viruses, fungi and bacteria that cause plant diseases. Plant biologists are working to create plants with genetically-engineered resistance to these diseases.
• Cold tolerance Unexpected frost can destroy sensitive seedlings. An antifreeze gene from cold water fish has been introduced into plants such as tobacco and potato. With this antifreeze gene, these plants are able to tolerate cold temperatures that normally would kill unmodified seedlings.
• Drought tolerance/salinity tolerance As the world population grows and more land is utilized for housing instead of food production, farmers will need to grow crops in locations previously unsuited for plant cultivation.
• Nutrition Malnutrition is common in third world countries where impoverished peoples rely on a single crop such as rice for the main staple of their diet. However, rice does not contain adequate amounts of all necessary nutrients to prevent malnutrition. If rice could be genetically engineered to contain additional vitamins and minerals, nutrient deficiencies could be alleviated. For example, blindness due to vitamin A deficiency is a common problem in third world countries. Researchers at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Institute for Plant Sciences have created a strain of "golden" rice containing an unusually high content of beta-carotene (vitamin A).
Pharmaceuticals Medicines and vaccines often are costly to produce and sometimes require special storage conditions not readily available in third world countries. Researchers are working to develop edible vaccines in tomatoes and potatoes16, 17. These vaccines will be much easier to ship, store and administer than traditional injectable vaccines.
• Phytoremediation Not all GM plants are grown as crops. Soil and groundwater pollution continues to be a problem in all parts of the world. Plants such as poplar trees have been genetically engineered to clean up heavy metal pollution from contaminated soil18.
And I didn't mention
Economical
GM supporters tell farmers that they stand to reap enormous profits from growing GM crops. Initially, the cost is expensive but money is saved on pesticides. To produce the GM crops, modern biotechnology is used which requires highly skilled people and sophisticated and expensive equipment.7 Large companies need considerable investments in laboratories, equipment and human resources, hence the reason why GM crops are more expensive for farmers than traditional crops. GM crops, farmers are told, are a far better option. It takes a shorter time to produce the desired product, it is precise and there are no unwanted genes. And is good income for the country because this makes an increase in their production.
THE SOLUTION IS NOT TO STOP THE SCIENCE THIS IS A SOLUTION FOR LAZY PEOPLE IS BETTER TO IMPROVE OUR GOVERNMENT IN THIS WAY WE ARE GOING TO PUT SOLUTION TO EVEN MORE PROBLEMS NOT JUST THIS ONE :) and sorry for the retardment it was because you wrote too much.
Debate Round No. 2
Lauren_k

Pro

I thank my opponent for their reply. As for the comment about me writing too much, this is an 8000 character debate, a heavy topic, and certain key points have to be made. I will try to make it as concise as possible, if you try to improve your grammar.

REBUTTAL:

1) " These largely unregulated ingredients found in 60-70% of the foods in the US. " You asked, how in the world do I know this? I researched my topic. Here are two different sources stating the same information.
http://www.seedsofdeception.com...
http://www.longislandpress.com...

It is not illogical to have untested GMO ingredients in 60-70% of our food supply. We know they are GMO, but their safety is not tested. You are placing too much on the government. Monsanto employees are in the halls of government! [1] Check out this chart http://redgreenandblue.org...
Monsanto has been gathering well connected ex-Congressmen, Senators and other government officials to go back and lobby the government, using their connections for their company's benefit. [1] In other words, Monsanto is well in with the government, and it's all due to control, power, and most importantly money.

2) What I stated above is the perfect segue into the corruption that takes place. Altering genes of plants and animals of natures has had detrimental consequences. The more you deviate from nature the more problems we face. Isn't it ironic that you are talking about how altering genes of our food supply can crack the code to many diseases, when in fact many diseases stem from these processed altered foods, and pollution in the world that comes along with these uneconomical practices. Now there is a paradox!

Can you name more enterprises than Monsanto, and back up you claims? 9 out of 10 soybean seeds are GMO and but come from Monsanto. I'll do the research for you.
Monsanto, DuPont, and Syngenta combined own 47% of the global seed market which robs consumers and farmers of the most basic right to choose what they will eat and grow. [2]
The entire GM seed business is based on corporate control: The seeds are non-replenishing and must be purchased anew each season, eliminating the farmer tradition of saving and re-using seeds. [2] Another way of putting more money in their pockets and controlling our food supply. This does not sound very democratic to me.

Here look at these statistics.

The World's Top 10 Seed Companies

1.Monsanto (US) - $4,964m - 23%
2.DuPont (US) - $3,300m - 15%
3.Syngenta (Switzerland) - $2,018m - 9%
4.Groupe Limagrain (France) - $1,226m - 6%
5.Land O' Lakes (US) - $917m - 4%
6.KWS AG (Germany) - $702m - 3%
7.Bayer Crop Science (Germany) - $524m - 2%
8.Sakata (Japan) - $396m - <2%
9.DLF-Trifolium (Denmark) - $391m - <2%
10.Takii (Japan) - $347m - <2% [3]

4) That last thing Monsanto and these companies are scared of is people getting sick. These companies are so rich and powerful, you wouldn't have the money or the means to go after them. How can they have economic losses, when their foods aren't even labeled that they are GMO. Oh yea, that's exactly why they aren't labeled! Because most people don't want them. Individuals aren't the only ones wary of these practices. Countries are banning them.

Two Mexican states ban GM corn http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com...
Africa: Algeria, Egypt
Asia: Sri Lanka, Thailand, China, Japan, Phillipines
Europe: The European Union, Norway, Austria, Germany United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, Greece, France, Luxembourg, Portugal
Latin America: Brazil, Paraguay
Middle East: Saudi Arabia
Pacific: American Samoa, Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Australia, New Zealand
[5]

4) Where do you get claims from? There is no evidence that GMO clean up the environment, and he did not back up his claim so I'll assume he made it up. Organic enterprises are common, the are just being overshadowed, and bullied by these Biotec companies.
New research adds to the mountain of evidence that genetically modified crops not only require more pesticides — defeating one purpose of their existence — but lead to new insect populations that are resistant to the biopesticides contained in the crops. [6] As insects adapt to the GMO plants, the pesticide becomes worthless. GMO create a vicious cycle of further genetic alteration, it's not a one fixes all. [6]

Organic and sustainable farming practices do not require endless amounts of genetic modification, heavy pesticide use, and the negative health effects that go along with it all. [6] It seems that when Monsanto isn't involved, farming becomes much simpler, healthy, and environmentally friendly. [6]

As for the benefits, my opponent cited
http://library.thinkquest.org....
http://www.articlesbase.com...
without giving any credit.

I will now address the fallacy, that GM foods can be an end to world hunger. It's only been causing more problems like stated above. A recent United Nations (UN) report explains that eco-farming, which uses natural growing methods rather than chemical- and GM-based methods, has actually boosted food production much more significantly than any GM methods have. [7] In truth, GMOs have failed in virtually every category of supposed benefit -- they simply do not live up to the industry hype. [7]

To date there has not been one credible study proving GMO's to be safe. Science should not be stopped, but when science advances in a way that does more harm then good, it is time reconsider the people, and take the power away from these power hungry Biotect companies.

Resources

http://redgreenandblue.org... [1]
http://www.csmonitor.com... [2]
http://www.gmwatch.org... [3]
http://eatdrinkbetter.com...[4]
http://www.purezing.com...[5]
http://naturalsociety.com... [6]
http://www.naturalnews.com... [7]
Tuxido_night

Con

Tuxido_night forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Lauren_k

Pro

My opponent seems to have deactivated his account.
Tuxido_night

Con

Tuxido_night forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Lauren_k

Pro

Lauren_k forfeited this round.
Tuxido_night

Con

Tuxido_night forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Lauren_k 5 years ago
Lauren_k
I had a feeling it was going to happen, that's why I was more than happy to start it up again with you.
Posted by wmpeebles 5 years ago
wmpeebles
Wow that's a shame. I hate when people forfeit on me, especially after putting forth a lot of work to get a debate going.
Posted by Lauren_k 5 years ago
Lauren_k
I like that Tuxido_night is making up what labeling is used for. Labeling is not about being a warning, it's about consumers knowing what they are getting!
Posted by Tuxido_night 5 years ago
Tuxido_night
If the industry doesn't label their products is because is no necesary, also labeling food means a warning about the health but as there are any dangerous there is no need of label :)
Posted by Lauren_k 5 years ago
Lauren_k
I completely disagree and I do not know what convinces you otherwise. If GMO's are so safe than why does the Biotech industry no want to label their products as GMO? Wouldn't they be proud of their wonderful product? The same genetic material inserted into their DNA that give them their desirable traits are also the same ones that make them quite detrimental to health.
Posted by Riza_Rosette 5 years ago
Riza_Rosette
Banans are both genetically altered and completely healthy... Just pointing that out.
Posted by Lauren_k 5 years ago
Lauren_k
wmpeebles, I'd definitely be open to that. This debate is for an assignment of mine, so if you are interested and can finish it through, that'd be great. Want me to start another up now?
Posted by wmpeebles 5 years ago
wmpeebles
I would like to debate this topic in the future, Lauren_k if you would be interested..
Posted by Lauren_k 5 years ago
Lauren_k
Hi Tuxido_night. Thanks for joining. Remember that the first round I just want you to accept. Wait till round 2 to debate. Thanks.
Posted by Lauren_k 5 years ago
Lauren_k
Yes, plants and animals.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Maikuru 5 years ago
Maikuru
Lauren_kTuxido_nightTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Full forfeit by Con.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
Lauren_kTuxido_nightTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: F
Vote Placed by MasterKage 5 years ago
MasterKage
Lauren_kTuxido_nightTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit, and Pro refuted Con's claims, which Con was unable to rebut seeing as he deactivited his account.
Vote Placed by thett3 5 years ago
thett3
Lauren_kTuxido_nightTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: F