When a child is brought into the world, like its thumb print, it has its own characteristics that distinguish them from the other seven billion people in the world. Currently, no child is perfect, it is expected of them to grow up learning from their mistakes and capitalizing on their own unique talents and skills. The introduction of genetically modifying babies will soon cause abnormalities to disappear because of the preferred physical and mental traits that are chosen. A committee appointed by the Food and Drug Administration are in the works to create mitochondrial manipulation technologies. As a result, women with inheritable mitochondrial disease will be able to discard the nuclear material and place it into an egg of a donor that is healthy (Darnovsky). The motive is to help prevent the chances for disease to spread in the future. The F.D.A were pressured to come up with this solution because of the “1,000 to 4,000 children” that are born with the disease are not able to convert food into energy and will be exposed to toxins (Darnovsky). Although this can help get rid of the disorder from the mutations of the DNA, the majority of society is worried about the long term effects of these procedures. They are uncertain about whether the changes in the genes could lead to worse effects and the limitations of engineering in the future. Will the procedures be able to be efficient enough to overcome the social and ethical issues of manipulating gene codes?  Modern society has been adapting to genetic modification, but they are accepting this “normality” without educating themselves with scientific reasons why genetic modification could be either harmful or beneficial.With the creation of genetic modification, the amount of food produced has increased, the chances of obtaining diseases have lowered, and the quality of food has improved. However, gene mutation holds severe risks, allergic reactions may occur, and it is heavily expensive which can lead to the exploitation of consumers.

Genetic engineering is the process of altering the gene structure within an organism, such as humans, crops, and animals, by using transformation and molecular cloning techniques. It has been around for centuries since humans first began to domesticate their organisms. However, the first critical advancements of genetic modification were created during the 1950s when sufficient amount of scientific research was made to understand how genes worked. Around the late 1990s, crops first began to be engineered on, since then the food has been improved and sold vastly for human consumption at local markets. Since its upgraded creation, it has sparked controversy of scientific research over ethics and morality. Genetic engineering is applauded for creating crops that could be able to withstand harsh weather conditions, and its potential to prevent, “passing on terribly degenerative diseases” to future generations (“Pros and Cons of Genetic Engineering”). On the other hand, the public is skeptical about the allowance of future overpopulation, the end of diversity for organisms, and stepping over the boundaries of genetic engineering. Genetic engineering is a controversial topic because it is relevant to every aspect of our lives: food, health, and future. In other words, it is believed that genetic modification has the capacity to overcome fatal diseases that are inherited and benefit crops to live longer, but it is too soon to see the actual effects that can happen when the DNA sequence of the organism is altered.

The reason why many support innovative procedures in genetic modification is because since the late 1990s, farmers have benefited greatly from the modification of their crops. Farmers have reported that their crops being infested by pest have decreased due to the insect resistant cotton and corn, “Corn farmers experienced a 13 percent increase in yields just from IR technology, while cotton farmers experienced 17+ percent yield gains as compared to conventional farming. In 2014 alone, IR genetically engineered corn was responsible for $5.3 billion in added income for farmers globally” (Staropoli). The crops that have been adapted to grow efficiently without intervention have added increases in incomes collectively, and it also allows for them to grow more in less land—thus it could be the beginning for the end of world hunger because of the large surplus of crops. Farmers also acknowledged that genetically modified crops have helped the environment because their cultivations globally have reduced the percentage of carbon dioxide emission savings by almost “2.4 billion kg.” It is estimated that the growth of “carbon sequestration,” which was a result of less cultivation of land, was similar to the retraction of “approximately 8 million cars from the road” (Staropoli). Genetically modified crops are favored by farmers and learners of agriculture because of the economic and environmental benefits of having access to them on their land. In addition, Bill Gates alongside most scientists, have proclaimed that genetically modified foods are not extremely harmful for consumption, “organizations like the National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the European Commission have publicly said genetically modified foods are safe to eat. A large 2013 study on GMOs found no "significant hazards directly connected with the use of genetically engineered crops. And nearly all the food we eat today has been genetically modified in some way” (Brodwin). Current foods have some genetic altering to appeal to customers whether it is the size, smell, or taste. Before allowing genetically engineered foods to be sold, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) check to see if the products are safe for consumers. As a result, an excess of food that have less pesticides, reduced cost, and longer “shelter life” are available to the public (Wax).

Genetic modification spurs negative reactions from society because they are worried of disordering the earth’s resources further. Farmers have worried about the condition of their fields. A result of this has been the creation of “super weeds” which have grown to resist against glyphosate, a recurring herbicide found in genetically engineered products. A farmer has also stated that his genetically modified wheat has “growing in fields where he had not planted it” and there are other cases where “GMO plants have also escaped into the nation’s farmland” (Connealy). Therefore, farmers are doubtful of whether they should invest heavily in modified crops when the reactions are unpredictable. The price of seed prices have increased as the seed options have decreased. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service have discovered that the prices of soybean and corn seeds have increased over the past two decades by over 80-90 percent. Farmers are making less profit because they are paying large amounts, and are receiving lower value  returns. Also, their selections have become minimized since big seed companies, such as Monsanto and DuPont, have been eliminating non-GMO varieties of foods (Roseboro). Genetic modification of crops has been drastically changing the production made by farmers and the food we ate. To add on, a Harvard recruit from Beijing, Luhan Yang, has proposed that the project of engineering genes for a child has raised more fear than promise. More specifically, “The fear is that germ-line engineering is a path toward a dystopia of superpeople and designer babies for those who can afford it” (Regalado). Researchers have predicted that genetically modified procedures will benefit only the wealthy resulting in middle-class citizens not being able to participate in altering the genes of their children. The Genome Surgery was an idea created by physicians to correct genes; however, researchers believe that gene therapy will not “affect germ cells,” and the changes made to DNA cannot be passed down to future generations (Regalado).

All in all, genetically modified organisms are believed to have the ability to increase the amount of food produced, decrease the chances of obtaining diseases, and improve the quality of food. However, it is also believed to hold severe risks where allergic reactions may occur, not work efficiently, and can lead to the exploitation of consumers. With the constant advancements of technology, society is evolving to obtain updated versions of quality available for the public. Genetically modified organisms, regardless of its perceived risks or grants, will continue to make an impactful presence among the citizens in modern society. It is up to consumers to trust the scientists or their instincts on where they should invest their time and money.

Works Cited

Brodwin, Erin. “Bill Gates Calls GMOs 'Perfectly Healthy' - and Scientists Say He's Right.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 27 Feb. 2018.

Connealy, Leigh Erin. “GMO Foods Have Not Proven Themselves Safe. Here's What to Do about It.” Newport Natural Health, 8 Dec. 2017.

Darnovsky, Marcy. “Genetically Modified Babies.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 23 Feb. 2014.

“Pros and Cons of Genetic Engineering.” Conserve Energy Future, 9 Dec. 2017.

Regalado, Antonio. “We Uncovered the Plan to Engineer the Human Species.” MIT Technology Review, MIT Technology Review, 7 Apr. 2016.

Roseboro, Ken. “Food Democracy Now.” The GMO Seed Monopoly: Fewer Choices, Higher Prices | Food Democracy Now, Food Democracy Now, 4 Oct. 2013.

Staropoli, Nicholas. “Are There Environmental and Economic Benefits to GMO Crops? Study Claims $150+ Billion since '96.” Genetic Literacy Project, 12 Jan. 2018.

Wax, Emily. “Genetically Engineered Foods.” MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia, 14 Aug. 2016.