Essay Sample on The Fear of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

Introduction

Negative consumer perception towards genetically modified organism (GMOs) has been existence for an extended period. Since the late 1990s when biotechnologists discovered genetic engineering to address food shortage in the world, retrogressive food-activists have worked hard to spread slander concerning the initiative. Contrary, scientists have clarified GMOs as safe for human and animal consumption. Moreover, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Drug Association (FDA) have identified GMOs as safe for use (Martin, 2013). Nevertheless, it is challenging to change consumer psychology concerning the safety of the foods. Despite numerous efforts by food technologists and scientists to rule out the negative attitude towards GMOs, the public's little knowledge on food technology, retrogressive campaigns, and flawed intuitions, continue to spread fear among people regarding the biotechnology's safety.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Meaning of Genetically Modified Organisms

GMOs are bioengineered crops developed through genetic modification. Scientists identify preferable traits or genes in living organisms, isolate them, and transfer them into plants to increase their viability. The preferred characteristics include herbicide tolerance, resistance to pest and diseases, and the ability to grow in harsh conditions. The above elements enable farmers to increase their crop production and control weeds efficiently.

GM foods include bananas, tomatoes, potatoes, maize, and apples. Biotechnologists modify these crops to improve their color, size, taste, and flavor. Notably, Favr Savr tomato was the first bioengineered crop in the world (Martin, 2013). Significantly, one of the primary reasons why corporations incorporate GMOs in food is to induce favorable plant characteristics to curb food shortage in the world. The crops faster and produce high yield due to the incorporation of fertility genes. Secondly, they preserver harsh conditions such as high temperatures and water scarcity in dry regions. Thirdly, the genetic manipulation induces desirable commercial characteristics in farm produce. For instance, GM fruits have a long shelf life compared to natural ones.

Psychology of Why Some People Dislike and Resist Gmos in Their Food

On the other hand, the fear of allergens or carcinogens in GM foods among consumers has rendered them unpalatable in many countries (Martin, 2013). Today, cancer, which is mostly a lifestyle disorder, has risen to be the leading cause of death in the world. Thus, people have become wary of what they consume to prevent the prevalence of the menace. As a result, they have an immense fear of GM foods since they require high amounts of chemicals during production. Individuals perceive herbicides and insecticides to contain harmful materials that can cause health complication. Additionally, according to Martin (2013), the fear intensified in Europe after flawed tests in which rats fed with GM corn developed tumors. The situation created a negative perception towards the foods, which has been difficult to eliminate.

Secondly, flaws in human intuitions continue to engrave biases among the public towards the development of GMOs in the world. The human brain is not capable of addressing sophisticated questions about biotechnology, and if they do, there is a high possibility of relapse to biases (Blancke, Van Breusegem, De Jaeger, Braeckman, & Van Montagu, 2015). Lay people who have inadequate knowledge of science tend to believe what is explained in uncensored media since it is attractive to the mind. In this case, people choose to believe what aligns with their gut feelings and is easy to comprehend and remember. According to Blancke et al. (2015), GMO antagonists have tapped this power and utilized it to promote their retrogressive agenda. The situation has led to increased disgust towards GMO foods across the world.

Thirdly, Blancke et al. (2015) state that the presence of folk biology across the world contributes to the negative attitude towards GMOs. Psychological essentialism is one example of this folk biology, which enables people's minds to categorize various biological systems accordingly. Unfortunately, it limits their cognitive ability to understand evolutionary science regarding GMOs since it allows individuals to perceive DNA as the primary essence of organisms. Therefore, people develop a negative attitude towards bioengineered crops since they are not natural. For example, research conducted in the U.S. identified that the public perceived that tomatoes with catfish induced DNA would have a similar taste to that of a fish (Blancke et al., 2015). The scenario portrays how people ignore science and introduce essentialist bias in GMOs. Notably, activists protest using posters revealing tomatoes with fish tails, which promotes fear among consumers.

Thirdly, economic activists utilized biotechnological illiteracy to gather sympathy from the public, which led to the ban on GM materials in Europe. Martin (2013) revealed that the initial introduction of bioengineered food in Europe was successful; nevertheless, media sensationalism and suspect science created a resistance towards the substances. Skeptical scientists conducted flawed tests on bioengineered food and published the results in non-peer-reviewed journals (Martin, 2013). The information created panic among people, a situation that has persisted to the present day.

Fourthly, retrogressive campaigns against GM foods have contributed to the increased fear. The GMO opponents disregard science and capitalize on people's intuitions to spread bias concerning the endeavor. Noticeably, the campaigns are economically motivated. Martin (2013) claims that European activists opposed the introduction of inorganic foods since bioengineering was associated with foreign multinationals. Europeans possess the financial ability to purchase organic foods from local retailers; therefore, induction of inorganics seemed misplaced in the region.

Fifthly, the "frankenfood" fallacy engraved in individuals' intentional and teleological intuitions accounts for the increased dislike of GMOs in diverse regions (Blancke et al., 2015). The intuitions relate to religious beliefs concerning nature. In this case, people believe that the world natural order exists for a specific reason and should not be altered. Therefore, this mode of thinking has elicited critics on bioengineering. Many GMO antagonists have accused scientists of taking up God's role of creation. They also critic scientist's efforts to alter natural order; thus, they refer biotech food as artificial (Blancke et al., 2015). Notably, the skepticism identifies that the biotechnology may overpower scientists and cause devastating environmental effects. Today, religious groups utilize intentional intuitions to campaign against genetically modified foods. The phenomenon has led to regions such as Europe to ban the production of GM foods.

Furthermore, environmentalists have a huge rationale on the adverse effects of bioengineering in the environment; thus their continuous resistance. They claim that extensive use of chemicals will result in the growth of weeds that are resistant to herbicides. Additionally, since the modified crops are resistant to pest and diseases, their spread in the environment can disrupt ecosystems (Martin, 2013). Notably, environmentalists raise fears of cross-pollination and gene contamination when Gm crops are planted near natural ones. The phenomenon led to the Mexican government banning the production of GM maize in the country.

Conclusion

Overall, GMOs are palatable and safe for human consumption about WHO reports. Many institutions prefer the use of GMOs to since they are resistant to pest, harsh weather and tolerate herbicides. However, fear of carcinogenic materials, retrogressive activism, flawed human intuitions, and biotechnological illiteracy continue to cause a substantial resistance and fear towards their consumption. The situation has led to many countries banning the growth of the GM crops.

References

Blancke, S., Van Breusegem, F., De Jaeger, G., Braeckman, J., & Van Montagu, M. (2015). Fatal attraction: the intuitive appeal of GMO opposition. Trends in Plant Science, 20(7), 414-418.

Martin, C. (2013). The psychology of GMO. Current Biology, 23(9), 356-359.