GMOs are Good and Bad, not One or the Other
Identify:
“GMO opponents would misrepresent farmers experiences with genetically modified crops, explaining, ‘I suspect they already know what they wanted to find and so didn’t take the trouble to check the facts’ (Tess Doezema).”
Explain:
The debate between GMO opponents and advocates has been occurring for a long time. This debate first started with scientists who were concerned about genetically modifying organisms. While this has been a hotly debated topic, I am interested in knowing why it has caused so much controversy. If you are concerned about genetically modified foods, then do not purchase them. Why must their be a debate?
People become so frustrated with the idea of GMOs. They do not want thier foods to be contaminated and create unhealthy trends in their families’ lives. However, genetically modified organisms, GMOs, are everywhere. They are our food, and they are our animals. People become so frustrated with GMOs in their foods that they forget about their family dog that is genetically modified. Most things now adays are modified in some way, that is how progression works. Items are modified to become better.
The same people who are against GMOs are quick to misrepresent the other party. This happens commonly in debates. One side states that farmers only seek the answers they want. I believe that farmers are just trying to make a living. I do not know why they are being attacked. The other side states that GMO opponents have no idea what they are talking about. I partly agree with this side, due to the fact that GMOs cannot be eradication because not all GMOS are bad. However, both sides hold merit. I think there are issues with GMOs that need to be addressed, but I also believe that not all GMOs are out to get you.
Question:
Why is this an all-or-nothing mentality? Why does one side have to be the end-all-be-all when it comes to GMOs? If people were really concerned about them, they would look for a solution, not a fight.
