This house would allow the development of Genetically Modified Organisms.

[ - 디베이팅데이 ]
토론에 참여하시기 전, 주제에 관한 현재의 의견을 밝혀주세요 : 중립

현재 중립에 있는 네모를 드래그하셔서 매우찬성, 찬성, 중립, 반대. 매우반대로 옮겨주시면 의견이 반영됩니다.

as

discussion

GMO(Genetically Modified Organism) is a food that is modified to have genes or traits that are impossible to have through earlier breeding method, for increase of production and convenience.
GMO is referred to as the second green revolution and uprising as the plan to solve the future food problem, but the experiments and specific damage influence cases on human body are still ongoing.
Regulations, legislations that regulate usage of the food, and debates are on going on different nations.
Usage of Genetically Modified Organism, is it a right choice for the moder people?

 

data

a. the definition of Genetically Modified Organism

Food made by modifying · transforming original gene in order to increase productivity and food quality, or agricultural product produced by gene recombination.
In 1995, Monsanto Corporation of US succeeded for the first time in modifying bean genes to increase immunity against colure to increase productivity and merchandising it.
Currently GMOs distributed worldwide are total of 50, including beans, corns, and potatoes.
GMOs are vulnerable to diseases and parasites, and high in productivity, so it may solve lack of food.
But on a long time intakes, it causes environmental problems via disturbing ecosystems and destabilizing it.
Thus debates on the malfeasance of GMOs are ongoing, and each nation is on its toes in response.

Genetically modified organism (Wikipedia)

b. Present condition of international, domestic GMO

Present condition of international GMO
There were total 68 kinds and 15spieces of GMOs cultivated worldwide, including canola, corns, and potatoes, at 2002.
Initially they were grown and developed in advanced countries such as the US and Canada but now countries such as Argentina and Brazil are also growing them.
For ten years until 2007, surface of cultivation was increased by 50 times.
Increase rate of cultivation surface area is also above 10% each year.
Cultivation surface area of GMs on 2004 was 810 million ha, which was increased by 15% from 2003, and about 47 times increased from the date of its origin, 1996.
According to the 2007 GMO present condition report, published by the ‘International Service for application of Agricultural BioTechnology’ on 2008, 23 countries were growing GMO, and the total cultivating surface area of GMO was 114.3million ha, which is 15% of total cultivation surface area, 1.5billion ha.
On 2008, due to lack of supply to demand, countries and corporations that banned import of GMOs, and the recognitions to it are slowly changing as well.
But in 2008, a legislation that put limitation to GMOs was made in France, causing a lot of debate.
GMO food was first launched in the market in the early 1990s.
The typical GMOs are beans, grains, canola, and cotton oils. There were animal foods developed as well, but almost none in the market.
Pig was modified to produce Omega 3 lactic acid through roundworm genes in 2006.
Researchers also have been developing genetically modified pig species that absorb plant phosphorus more efficiently.
As result, the content of phosphorus in their offal was reduced to 60%.

c. GMO in Korea.

Korea has set and is developing three basic goals in Agricultural Biotechnology. One of them is recording the first place worldwide in the new rice species development via agricultural biotechnology by 2010.
Under such goal, there are many goods under research and development, but no items were merchandised. Korea has imported over 6million tons of GMO beans from July of 2001 to the end of first half of 2007, but the reality is that no GMO component was detected and labeled on products such as oil, soy sauce and corn syrup.
Other than that, Korea is securing the right of knowledge of customers, and preparing diverse legislations to manage GMOs.

 

news

NYtimes, A Proposal to Modify Plants Gives G.M.O. Debate New Life . MAY 28, 2015

BBC, Black R., GM “golden rice” boosts vitamin A, March 28, 2005

Discovermagazine, GMOs of the Future: Two Recent Studies Reveal Potential of Genetic Technologies, March 31, 2015

 

pros opinion

a. GMO is food product approved officially by governments of many countries over the world.

Countries including Korea are in the hands that GMOs that are certified in safety are safe, and the few worrying voices rising from corners are only by the ethic approach of civil organizations that have no representation of governments.

b. Imported GMO food products are strictly being monitored.

Every GMO imported into Korea is limited to those certified under thorough and professional judgment by the special committee (Judge Committee of GMO safety examination).
Also, domestic distribution process after import is managed by the FDA, securing safety over GMO food, and no cases of direct damage or problems caused by GMOs were reported so far.

 

cons opinion

a. No one can guarantee the safety of GMO.

The problem with GMOs is that after effects of them in human body are unknown due to their protein structures that are different from earlier food. Not only that, GMO may cause problems on other proteins after absorption in human body. It not only causes allergies, but it is accumulated in a long term that could cause deformed children, thus needing sufficient safety regulation, but the fact that the time gap between generations is long, so there are no stable tests also fails to prove the safety of GMOs.

b. There are high cautions in limitations of managing imported food.

The thing is that GMO may be managed at the point of import, but the worried part is that damage could be caused in the process of production (including research) and distribution even if your country is not a GMO production country. Examples are production of non-certified LMO, non-intended inclusion of certified LMO into non-LMO, and natural growth by down grain during importing process.

 

reference

Human Genome Project information archive

foodnavigator

huffingtonpost:GMO

European Commission, Rules on GMOs in the EU

 

translate

유전자변형식품 사용, 올바른 선택인가


최초입장 결과 (67명 투표)
10 15 14 16
토론댓글 현황 (9개 주장)
33 67

  Opinions

  1. hans의 프로필
    Lv4 hans 님의 반대 의견 - 3년 전

    GMO is not a solution. The cause of “food shortage” is a monopoly.

    3 0 답글
  2. fronever의 프로필
    Lv1 fronever 님의 반대 의견 - 3년 전

    GMO foes fear these will create new allergic reactions. They also worry that foods made to resist disease and viruses will linger in your system after you eat them, and that could make antibiotics less effective. But no studies confirm this claim.

    4 3 답글
  3. 김승옥의 프로필
    Lv3 김승옥 님의 찬성 의견 - 3년 전

    Due to GMO, we are now secure from the fear of Malthus’s predictions. In other words, If there is no GMO, lots of people will suffer from Hunger much more than now .

    Also, GMO was first launched in the market in early 1990’s as you can see above. It has been almost 25 years, and there
    is no report of its serious harmful effect. In addition, Any single research has not prove its harmful effect.

    Considering these, GMO’s advantage is enormous and it’s side effect is hard to find and unclear. That is the reason why we should allow GMO.

    3 2 답글
    • sam의 프로필추천댓글
      Lv6 sam 님의 반대 의견 - 3년 전

      Maybe GMO can lead us to the land of plenty or end of starving.

      But it’s definetly not in these days.

      We must approch very carefuly about GMO because of these issues:
      1. Almost every GMO’s seed of plants are ruled by few companies and there’s no proper standards and regulation for GMO.

      2.While leading companies dominating the market, -the represenative is Monsanto Company- there were many issues what we can’t overlook. For example, some reserches warned that GM food’s in general can occur unpredicted allergies, toxins and antibiotic problems.

      3. There’s nobody who observing its influence to human. Genetic problems can’t be found in short term, so it can be outbreak after 2 to 3 decades or next generation. And if we found its problem, probably it’s too late to prevent its outbreaking.

      5 1
    • Moonsung Kim의 프로필
      Moonsung Kim 님의 반대 의견 - 3년 전

      I don’t totally disagree with GMO but i have one thing to poin out from what you said. I know GMO helps produce the mass production of food though, it’s absolutely not the reason we humans could be free from the dismal science, Melthus’s theory. His theroy was a very strong axiom prior to the idustrialisation so called “indusrty revolution”. However, as machines were adopeted in production, people had huge output. Then the price of some necessray items that were not affordable to ordinary people back then started going down. People got to afford the items. As for food, as steamboats were invented, people could export and import more and more. That means tradeoff vitalised markets. Well, before the industrialisation, there was agriculture revolution in England, which brought more productive output of food. So there were some courties that were brooding over how they should deal with surplus of agricultural products like France and India. So they stated exporting the surplus to where it was needed and then they imported what they do not produced and needed. Consequently, the tradeoff made up for the amount of food that one society needed thanks to the develpment of transpotation. and one minor mistake you made. With your logic, before GMO was out,great number of the people shoud’ve been dead from the famine before 1990. As you know, we were not.

      2 0
    • 김승옥의 프로필
      Lv3 김승옥 님의 찬성 의견 - 3년 전

      Well, so you mean that generally, hunger can be saved by transportation not by GMO? maybe that is right only in past.
      However, development of transprotation is not that much effective in dealing with hunger problems theseday.
      During the time of “industry revolution”, the number of people in 1804 was about 1 million. However, that of today is 6 million. And at the same time, from past to now, the land of cultivation is decreasing and the factory land is increasing.
      In other words, supply is getting shorter and demand is getting bigger.
      Do you still think transportation can solve the hunger problem theseday too?
      In this situation, if there is no GMO, the fact that “famine will be more serious.” is obvious.

      And as for your last comment.
      Before GMO, people in Africa suffer hunger much more seriously than now. Of course, you don’ know, because our country is not that poor. hunger problems were in Africa not in our country. And because of GMO, the condition is better in Africa.

      0 1
  4. 냥냥냥의 프로필
    냥냥냥 님의 반대 의견 - 3년 전

    Hardly do I understand why some come up with ‘food shortage’ or ‘famine’ inasmuch as this world already teems with food. The real culprit of massive hunger is not the quantity but unbalance; distribution. Even if a breakthrough is made in GMO so that twice, thrice, or hundreds of millions as much as what is yielded now food can be produced, it’ll be of no avail unless appropriate distribution is carried out. It will just greatly increase the amount of dumped food. If you wanna deal with famine, you’ve gotta change the system of food division.
    Beside that, GMO is infinitely dangerous in that it can change the crux of agriculture from how big farmland one has to how advanced a technology one has, which has already been happening in effect. What is called technology is destined to be retained by only a few, which will lead to a monopoly market. The risk of this notion of the market which a few perfectly corner can be beyond our wildest dreams. It means that a part of our lives directly related with survival is taken hold of by a few companies, the ultimate purpose of which is totally different from that of the government ; getting profit regardless of what is morally right or not.
    To make things worse, the situation where we can get only limited kinds of crops from a limited number of corporations in the malls around us can be conducive to the famine problem again. The farmers with ‘inferior’ species of crops will give up on agriculture, throwing away what seeds they had. The company will also not bother to manage the ‘inferior’ species that are not so lucrative or prolific. Then, what if an epidemic of plant disease fatal only to those which are on the market breaks out so that they all wither and die? Not the distribution but the shortage, which was once deemed perfectly solved, will excruciate the world again. Not only in the nature but also in the civilization the ‘diversity’ is important and consequential.

    2 0 답글
  5. 석류의 프로필
    Lv1 석류 님의 반대 의견 - 3년 전

    GMO is an abbreviation of ‘Genetically Modified Organisms.”

    It is a species made of converting, adding, removing the genes.

    After the synthesis of colon bacillus and insulin in 1978, gene recombination has affected the production of food.

    If GMO increases the efficiency of cultivating products, why do people boycott on GMO food products?

    GMO products both have benefits and disadvantages.

    The people who agree to GMO products claims that it is needed to provide enough food to the entire population.

    However, hunger problems in the world is not entirely caused by the lack of food.

    According to a research, 70% of the people who suffer from famine live in a country with a surplus of food.

    Famine is not solved by increasing the production of food, yet can be solved by the balance of division.

    2 0 답글
  6. 하버드대                                                                                              가고싶은 아이의 프로필
    Lv2 하버드대 가고싶은 아이 님의 찬성 의견 - 1년 전

    GMO 식품은 대량의 사망자를 만들었습니다.

    0 0 답글
찬반토론에 참여하기 전에 읽어주세요
  • 찬반토론은 서로간의 다름을 확인하기 위한 자리가 아니며, 서로를 인정하고 더 나은 지향점 을 찾아가기 위한 과정입니다.
  • 확인되지 않은 내용을 게재하실시 통보없이 삭제될 수 있습니다.
  • 상대방에 대한 기본적인 예의가 부족하거나, 비방을 목적으로 게재하실시 통보없이 삭제될 수 있습니다.

  • 토론의 순수성을 신뢰합니다.
  • 서로간의 차이와 다양성을 존중합니다.
  • 소통과 공감을 최고의 가치로 여깁니다.
  • 지식과 지혜의 조건없는 공유를 지향합니다.