An Arguement for Regulating Processed Foods

An Arguement for Regulating Processed Foods

Humans have begun the promising task of artificially altering food. Modern food production in most industrialized nations has been streamlined into producing as much as possible in the shortest time possible. This streamlining was done on a large-scale starting in 1960s with the advent of processed food. Processed foods are identified by the use of genetic engineering and chemical additives. Processed food has spread to all corners of the world with the American biotechnology corporations leading the way. These foods are super cost-effective, productive, and even tasty, but at the cost of safety to consumers and price of long-term damage to livestock and crops. The government needs more power in regulating the manufacturing and production of processed foods as they can be incredibly beneficial, but without regulation they may result in some long term harmful side effects.

Processed foods have been artificially manipulated by humans going all the way back to the factory farms they have been grown on. Large corporations find that “traditional” methods of farming, which are now known as organic, were far too inefficient and often growing periods took too long to be fully productive. However, that ended with the use of genetic engineering.

The term genetically-modified organism, or GMO is most commonly used to refer to crop plants created for human or animal consumption using the latest molecular biology techniques for human or animal consumption using the latest molecular biology techniques. According to Discovery Health, in their new article Dangers of Food Additives, “these plants have been modified in the laboratory to enhance desired traits such as increased resistance to herbicides or improved nutritional content. The enhancement of desired traits has traditionally been undertaken through breeding, but conventional plant breeding methods can be very time consuming and are often not very accurate” (Discovery Health). GMOs are created with five major goals in mind: pest resistance, cold/frost tolerance, drought and salinity tolerance, phytormeditation, and pharmaceuticals.

Discovery Health then goes on to say, “crop losses from pests, particularly those from insects can be staggering, resulting in devastating financial loss for farmers and starvation in developing countries. Farmers typically use many tons of chemical pesticides annually” Discovery Health (). Consumers do not wish to eat food that has been treated with pesticides because of potential health hazards, and run-off of agricultural wastes from excessive use of pesticides and fertilizers can poison the water supply and cause harm to the environment. Growing GM foods such as genetically-modified corn can help eliminate the application of chemical pesticides and reduce the cost of bringing a crop to market. The best known example of this is the use of B.t. genes in corn and other crops. B.t., or Bacillus thuringiensis, is a naturally occurring bacterium that produces crystal proteins that are lethal to insect larvae. B.t. crystal protein genes have been transferred into corn, enabling the corn to produce its own pesticides against insects such as the European corn borer which used to decimate corn farms. This has allowed American corn to sweep away all its competition as only one company has access to this innovation.

Also, crop loss to other competing plants can be very significant. For many crops, it is not cost-effective to remove weeds by physical means such as tilling, so farmers will often spray large quantities of different herbicides to destroy weeds, a time-consuming and expensive process that requires care so that the herbicide doesn't harm the crop plant or the environment which cannot always be guaranteed. Crop plants genetically-engineered to be resistant to one very powerful herbicide could help prevent environmental damage by reducing the amount of herbicides needed. For example, Monsanto has created a strain of soybeans genetically modified to be not affected by their herbicide product Roundup ®. A farmer grows these soybeans which then only require one application of weed-killer instead of multiple applications, reducing production cost and limiting the dangers of agricultural waste run-off. This has already been the case with most commercially produced crops in the United States. A 2010 USA Today article explains the scope of GM crops in American agriculture and states, “the ISAAA says by last year, biotech crops accounted for 85% to 95% of some key crops, including soybeans and cotton” which means that it is proving to be very cost-effective and allows farmers to maintain their profits and lose as few plants as possible (USA Today).

Many people feel that government has protected food sources in the United States. The problem is that the federal government and its agencies have little power and even fewer resources with which to regulate and guarantee