Whether genetically modified products are dangerous?
even more often should be heard Today about the genetically modified products (GMP). Almost in all cases their mention involves the appeal to dispute on their safety. The matter is that rumors about insufficient study of such products and consequently - not until the end of the revealed pluses and minuses of their use in food already managed to be spread. Opponents of charges to GMP are also not bad armed and as opposed to arguments against their use can offer the long list of the reasons which speak well for a subject of disputes. It causes need to get acquainted closer with all “ for “ and “ against “ that then everyone could make for himself a choice.
GMP became reality thanks to development of rather young direction of modern science - genetic engineering. Its main tools and rod idea - deepening in structure of substance up to molecules DNA and correction (replacement, addition, cutting) of their separate links. And operations of this sort can be made not only with plants which make a diet basis, but also with microorganisms and even animals. Subsequently such plants (bacteria, animal) are capable to gain properties necessary to the person.
Today in production of GMP such countries as the USA (63% of world output), Argentina, Canada, Brazil, China are in the lead. In Russia the share of genetically modified products makes 11 - 15%. The main products, by methods of genetic engineering subject to changes, soy, corn, cotton, and also potatoes, colza, rice, wheat, sugar beet are. At the same time practically all realized corn, cotton and soy oil are a product much stepped forward scientifically - technical progress.
What advantages which GMP have? In - the first, it is their productivity. In - the second, unpretentiousness to growth conditions, and also more long periods of storage. Besides, such products are created steady against the existing wreckers (insects, pathogenic microbes). Cost of their production below cost “ natural “ analogs. Lay hopes within a solution of the problem of providing all mankind with enough the food on them that can be observed on an example with creation of a grade of potatoes steady against the wreckers living on the African continent and, thus, capable to be used for fight against hunger on the least developed continent.
on the other hand, exists a number of aspects which force us to speak about prospects of genetically modified products with vigilance and even caution. At once it is worth remembering the rights of consumers. It is connected with the fact that heated arguments concerning whether it is worth specifying information that the components created with use of genetic engineering are a part realized through establishments of retail trade products are still conducted. Not all stand up “ for “ though the elementary common sense, it seems, dictates need of providing full information to the consumer concerning what it gets.
Noted insufficient study of GMP and their influence on live organisms explains the arising fears for life and health of the person, as well as for compatibility in the artificial way of the transformed organisms with natural ecosystems.
By itself there is also an ethics question. On the one hand - ethics in relation to the nature, how to call similar actions over what was always regulated proceeding from reasonable (other word I will not pick up, excuse) its laws and is based on these laws how not violence over the natural beginning?
But to these, according to many, doubtful and not such the ethical aspect of a problem of genetically modified products is not settled by convincing argument. It is a high time to remember about ethics of business. And it with an ulterior motive: the companies which managed to estimate profitability of production and realization of GMP enough predictably throw a monkey-wrench into the works of any ready to awaken public consciousness and to pay attention of society to not cloudlessness of the prospects approaching at active use of genetic engineering. World famous trademarks use GMP in the activity, and all complexity of a situation is distinctly looked through today: to become on the way of the leading multinational companies operating with the capitals abounding with zero, hardly in forces someone one. However, on condition that this someone - not consolidated society and not the strongest states of the world ready to combine efforts for a joint solution.
Complexity of an assessment of influence of GMP on a human body and on ecosystems speaks rather simply: there is an opportunity to fix and analyze a condition of live organisms (including the person) now when GMP are in free access rather short time. However far-reaching conclusions and more fundamental analysis it can be carried out only after decades, and till this time the question of safety of the use of GMP will remain open. It is similar to driving on the unfamiliar road to a night-time with the switched-off headlights: if something also happens, then something cannot be undertaken, and, above all - it will be impossible to return a situation to that point with which falling in an uncertainty chasm began.
There is a wish to point also to the curious disposition observed on a global scale: one countries as Switzerland, hold referenda and speak firm “ is not present “ GMP in their any look, others, lead by fighters for freedom and human rights in the person of the USA, without a moment`s hesitation, oppose even discussion (!) of consequences genetic modifikatsiiv scientific community, not to mention adoption of some documents of legislative character on this matter. Say that the American scientists concerned by this problem are forced to be published in the Western European editions.
As we see, GMP have advantages which can be used for the mankind benefit. As there are also obvious minuses. And there is the most terrible - uncertainty with which all this is connected. Business is not limited especially narrow “ is or is not “.
Everyone chooses on himself …