The Instigator
Con (against)
The Contender
Pro (for)

Should Genetically Modified Foods be allowed or banned?

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  
Debate Round Forfeited has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 3/22/2018 Category: Technology
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 975 times Debate No: 111274
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)


I know we shouldn"t ban GMOs because they can be used to increase crop yields, they are more productive for farmers, they help fight diseases and pests on crops, and we don"t have a clear understanding of how harmful they are.


Thank you for posting this debate.

Contention 1: It is paramount that we make sure a substance is safe for consumption before we allow it to be accessed by the general public. It has been stated by the negative (Con) that we do not have a clear understanding of how harmful Genetically Modified Organisms are. In response, I ask this: If we are not sure whether something is harmful to our biology, why does the Con seek to allow it for consumption for the general public? It is commonly accepted that in cases where the potential harm of a substance is unknown, we cannot allow it to be consumed by the general public. For example, when we build a bridge, it is imperative that we are sure the bridge will stand before we allow traffic to travel upon it. No engineer would ever argue that because they are not certain of the safety of the bridge, we should allow it to be accessed by the general public. In closely related cases involving medicine, it is common practice that new medications be exposed to rigorous clinical experimentation before it is allowed for access by the public, for the medication might prove to cause more harm than good. It makes no sense to argue that because we are unsure of the health hazards of something, that we allow exposure to mankind.

Contention 2: GMOs affect the environment. Due to the increased resistance from pests of certain GMO crops, members of some environments have less food to eat. As a result, the population of such pests drops; following that the population of the predators who feast on such pests drops as well as their food source dwindles. The result is a huge chain of species dying. Would it not make more sense to introduce more natural predators to the area to reduce the number of pests, rather than genetically modifying our crops?
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.