For more than half a century, scientists - like Pierre Lagoda of the International Atomic Energy Agency - have used radiation to scramble the genetic make-up of crops to produce "valuable mutants like red grapefruit, disease-resistant cocoa and premium barley for Scotch whiskey". This process has apparently been used for much of the produce people consume on a daily basis.
In these organic-minded times, the fact that we've been consuming genetically-altered produce is a little disheartening. Most people would agree that foods with artificial additives or alterations are most likely harmful to our health. Furthermore, radiation-induced produce doesn't exactly sound too appetizing. In the article, Broad makes it clear that Dr. Lagoda is well aware of these concerns: "the wide public fears about the dangers of radiation and the risks of genetically manipulated food", but still he "prides himself on being a good salesman" of the process. Still, I was skeptical.
At first glance, the title "Useful Mutants, Bred With Radiation," still doesn't do much to win over the reader about genetic engineering. In the midst of words like "Mutants" and "Radiation" , the sole word "Useful" doesn't have much bearing. The title didn't convince me that these crops could be beneficial, nor that the article would show that. The huge image of a flaming, dried up orange didn't seem to help either. The image itself took up about 25% of the front page of the Science section and had no caption. If I had never read the title of the article, I would have thought it was some new star discovered in some far-off galaxy.
After, reading the article, however, I was convinced that genetic engineered plants has its benefits. It explains that no trace of radiation is left over from the seed to offspring. The only changes made to the plant are positive: improvements in "yield, quality, taste, size, and resistance to disease". Furthermore, this process of altering plants has been especially promising in developing countries such as "Bangaldesh, China, Costa Rica, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kenya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Thailand, and Vietnam". Furthermore, the article combats the public's concerns with story after story of tragic crop failure redeemed by new, genetically empowered crops.
The implications of genetic engineering, of course, are still uncertain. Many may argue that genetically altering plants are encouraging scientists to genetically alter animals or even humans. Cloning has been a huge topic in scientific circles today. I think animal cloning has already been accomplished. Unfortunately, I definitely don't know enough about the science world to say too much about genetic engineering. I'm probably way over my head. But genetically altered plants does leave a question about whether this is an ethical concern or not. I personally feel that a process that creates disease-resistant crops and greater crop yields is ultimately ethical. The process allows for more mouths to be fed in a shorter amount of time and at a lower cost. What a blessing! The fact that we can accomplish such a feat is a gift from God. But like all gifts, it can definitely be abused.
**Edited after session because I forgot to check Blackboard before I started the blog. My apologies.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Very interesting topic! The debates and presuppositions regarding genetic alterations are truly a massive concern in today’s world. Unlike how you saw the topic, I viewed it instantly as positive and beneficial to our world and its food supply and agreed with your statements nearing the end of the blog. These genetically altered plants have indeed proven themselves advantageous in many situations worldwide. However, one thing I found interesting in the article that you never discussed was Dr. Lagoda’s view of his work “mimicking nature” as “the motor of evolution.” This viewpoint, though obviously secular, I found to be of particular personal curiosity. The basic understanding of evolution based on the definition found in Webster’s Dictionary is a gradual, natural, and beneficial changes. However, Dr. Lagoda’s process seems to contradict this definition by adding, instant, scientifically produced, and mutations. Therefore, the fact that he views himself as a hand in the world’s evolution process I think adds a bit of interest to the basic story as well as the greater debate.
"The process allows for more mouths to be fed in a shorter amount of time and at a lower cost. What a blessing! The fact that we can accomplish such a feat is a gift from God. But like all gifts, it can definitely be abused."
I like your last concluding sentence, it is very true. Genetic engineering is a huge topic, but you did a greeat job in wrapping it up in a thoughtful and well-written blog.
I don't agree that just because something is beneficial to our society, it is automatically ultimately ethical. Wouldn't cloning then be ultimately ethical as well...? If, say, they were produced to take over child labor so children in poor countries would be able to have time to go to school.
Very well written.... and you are brave for choosing such a complex topic!
Difficult topic! This issue is debated so much and it's hard to decide whether it is something moral or immoral.
God has called us to reach out to the needy. Will we still be able to do that when all this genetic altering begins? I think our country is choosing an easy way out, instead of confronting the problem. Like Friends of the Earth have said, this is a political issue, not a scientific one.
We need to assume our responsibilty as Christians and do what God has called us to do and that is to "...not conform any longer to the pattern of this world...."
Wonderful job Elizabeth! I really enjoyed how you included your thought process into the blog and how that changed as you read further into the article. It is a good topic to be thinking about and I'd have to agree that there are cases (such as this) where genetic engineering has it's benefits. I appreciate the organic lifestyle (even though I am not strictly organic in my eating habits) however the way I see it, we have been told in the Bible that the world is slowly running down. Even science agrees in the idea of Entropy. Because of sin and the fallen state of this world, we will never ultimately "get better" until the Christ returns. What we can do now is try and steward well what we have, being wise with our gifts and resources. Good job getting people thinking!
Post a Comment