The Instigator
The_Debate_Czar
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
nDevelop
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Genetically Modified Organisms should be banned at the moment in the Developed World

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 1 vote the winner is...
The_Debate_Czar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/21/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,015 times Debate No: 55193
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

The_Debate_Czar

Pro

Rounds:
1. Acceptance
2. Opening Statement/Presentation of Argument
3. Rebuttal
4. Summation
Please note the particular wording of the topic. It specifies that Genetically Modified Organisms should be banned in the developed world right now.
Please use this definition of a Genetically Modifies Organism (you may abbreviate GMO if you so choose):
Genetically modified (GM) foods are foods derived from organisms whose genetic material (DNA) has been modified in a way that does not occur naturally. (Source: World Health Organization)
Banning consists of preventing all growth, sale and consumption of GMOs.
The Developed World is considered to be any nation with a Human Developmental Index of "Very High." Please use the United Nations Developmental Programme Database at <http://hdr.undp.org...; for more information.
Please write a comment for any informal questions.
Thank You and Good Luck!
nDevelop

Con

Hello, I am accepting this debate. (Don't know if that's how its suppose to go, this is my first debate I'm participating in).
If I do mess up on a round sorry, this is my first debate. But I have confidence I won't.

Thank You, and hope to have a great friendly debate!

~Brian
Debate Round No. 1
The_Debate_Czar

Pro

Professor Philip James of Director of the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen has proclaimed, "The perception that everything is totally straightforward and safe is utterly naive. I don't think we fully understand the dimensions of what we're getting into." The problem with GMOs is that we just don"t know enough about them. We are the Guinea pigs. We are the experimental group. We, the consumers of GMOs are the ones taking all of the risks. Do you feel safe consuming food originating from test tubes that has not properly been tested? Despite the fact that GMOs could have potentially detrimental effects on the ecosystems in which they are grown and on the people who consume them, the United States Government has failed to act accordingly, not even requiring labelling of GMOs. That is why I am proposing the immediate banning of GMOs in this debate in the developed world before a full clinical trial can be conducted.
Did you know that every time you have a bowl of General Mills Cereal you are consuming GM corn? This corn contains genes from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis in order to produce Bt toxin against the European Corn Borer. Now if you are familiar with the concept of biological magnification, it is easy to see how these toxins can be potentially dangerous in humans as top-level consumers. If this corn is fed to perhaps a pig, that is then consumed by a human, high levels of Bt toxin will be concentrated in human tissue and the human blood stream. As study by the University of Brasilia has even shown that high levels of Bt toxin in human blood decreased both the number of Red Blood Cells and their size in mammalian models. Just imagine the disastrous effects that this toxin can have on Americans who regularly consume GM products.
A major part of the problem is the lack of proper testing that has occurred on Genetically Modified Organisms. GMOs are transgenic and are the first transgenic organisms to be consumed by humans. In fact, the transgene method is very similar to transform bacteria to produce insulin. Now what"s the difference you may ask? The first insulin-producing bacteria were tested extensively through clinical trials by the FDA before they hit the market. GMOs on the other hand have not undergone any prolonged studies by the FDA, which has failed to acknowledge them as drugs and not food products. No clinical trial has been performed highlighting the argument to ban GMOs until further testing has cleared them for human consumption.
Other health risks due to GMO consumption include increased cancer risks and generally unknown effects. Scientists at the leading MD Anderson Cancer Center at the University of Texas Austin have advised patients to consume organic foods to ensure that they do not experience the potentially negative effects of GMOs.
Perhaps even more prevalent than health risks, ecological risks offer major reasons to prevent GMO proliferation. To begin, we must question the purpose of GMOs. They are intended to be more fit that their predecessors to be grown in the environment in which they are. This poses a major threat to native species and other strains in the environment. If these organisms escape from their farms they may be considered invading species and have the capacity to drive to extinction organisms that are a vital part of the ecosystem.
This concept also connects to biodiversity. GMO strains for the most part are genetically identical to each other (zero biodiversity). If these GMOs were able to escape and wipe out other species, they would replace them with species that exhibit no genetic biodiversity. As sudden shift in the environment such as those seen due to global warming could wipe out life as we know it. Now what about the super virus? If one virus is able to target the GMO population in theory it would be able to wipe every single organism out because they are all identical and not one would evince resistance to this virus. What makes this situation even scarier is that the components of the super virus might already be inside the GMO. The transgenes are typically inserted using viral pieces, such as the strong promoter of the CaMV 35S promoter. What would be the effect if this provirus turned into a super virus that could devastate an entire harvest of a continent?
I have presented you with the facts. You have heard the overwhelming risks of GMOs. Now, I believe it is time to take action and ban GMOs in the developed world. The citizens of the developed world do not deserve the guinea pig status of being consumers GMOs. Many developed countries in the EU have already installed measures to completely ban GMOs. It is time that the rest of the developed world follows. GMOs must immediately be taken off shelves, stripped off of farms and banned from consumption before Pandora"s Box opens and it is too late.

Sources:
www.nongmoproject.org/
www.collective-evolution.com/
www.mdanderson.org/
environmentalcommons.org/
www.who.int/
www.nlpwessex.org/
nDevelop

Con

nDevelop forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
The_Debate_Czar

Pro

Unfortunately I don't have much to rebut... But I will add some more information about negative non-biological effects of GMOs that currently existent.

Aggressive Tactics- Monsanto is notorious for its bellicose ways, picking fights with destitute farmers over accidental GMO contamination. In one court case, a farmer's crops were cross-pollinated by a large-scale GMO farm. He grew his crops which had some advantage for being hybrids. However, GMO sued him for his right to grow the crops despite the Monsanto farm being the one in error. Monsanto, with their big-wig lawyers got their ways of course and the poor farmer was forced to give up his harvest. These problems can be avoided if GMOs would be banned, so indigent farmers will get to keep their precious harvests.

Lack of Labelling- In the United States currently, no GMO labelling at any threshold is mandated by law. This poses a problem, as consumers purchase and consume GMOs unknowingly incurring possible health risks in the process. In the EU labelling is more clearly defined, but consumers may still unknowingly purchase GMOs. If they were outright banned, consumers would be able to ensure that the products they buy are GMO-free and prevent the health risks discussed in the last round

GMO Patenting- Patents on genes has become a major problem in the United States and elsewhere where infortation systems are highly developed and GMOs are legal. The Supreme Court ruled that non-human gene sequences can be patented, as well as genetically modified organism's genomes. This has concentrated the wealth from GMOs with the patent ownership of only a few companies such as Mansanto, Novartis and DuPont. This limits competition and the flourishing of capitalism in the Western World as companies have borderline-monopolies on their specialized fields. Many people have advocated making genes public domain in order to prevent this monopolizing, but I more effective solution might be banning GMOs outright.

These current problems further authorize the banning of GMOs in the developed world at the moment.

Sources:
http://www.rodalenews.com...
http://classes.soe.ucsc.edu...
http://www.agricultureandfood.co.uk...
nDevelop

Con

nDevelop forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
The_Debate_Czar

Pro

The_Debate_Czar forfeited this round.
nDevelop

Con

nDevelop forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by BasicLogic 3 years ago
BasicLogic
Czar, wanna debate this sometime In the future.
Posted by BasicLogic 3 years ago
BasicLogic
Sounds fun
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Tore_Mihror 2 years ago
Tore_Mihror
The_Debate_CzarnDevelopTied
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 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: Forfeit, and PRO had a better argument, grammar, and sources.