Monsanto vs. GMO's

There's a growing movement in the food industry as more and more people are realizing the lack of transparency coupled with an alarming habit of our government to favor certain private industry giants within our food production system. One of the biggest outcries from the grassroots movement is the idea of GMO's becoming more common in our food supply without proper testing or labeling. But is this movement rejecting new scientific breakthroughs, which could possibly benefit society, because the companies which wield them do so irresponsibly?

Since there is little documented evidence among the plethora of rumors regarding the dangers of genetically engineered foods, the argument against GMO's is based on ad hominem attacks towards the corporations which have cornered the genetic engineering field. While these attacks may not be sufficient evidence for the harmfulness of GMO's, they are not in the least unfounded. There's tons of reading material online as well as popular documentaries which highlight the strategies of GMO giants like Monsanto, so I won't go into too much detail. But when we find the ex-VP and main lobbyist for Monsanto serving as our government's“food czar” (as well as many other Monsanto ex-employees findingjobs in shaping our public policy), when hapless farmers are sued by Monsanto for frivolous cases or situations outside of their control, when our Monsanto infiltrated government proposes retaliation for European countries who refuse to use Monsanto crop, and Monsanto's reach is far enough to twist the arms of local news stations to misrepresent studies and fire reporters who try to tell the truth, there is obviously something wrong with the way businesses are allowed to conduct themselves in a free market.

But is the behavior of one megacorporation enough reason to completely reject a new technology in which the possibilities are unimagined at this point? The fact that Monsanto doesn't allow independent study on the safety or side-effects of their crops which are being pumped into our food system is alarming regarding our personal health, but does that mean we should reject GMO's from all angles, forever? Imagine if things were run a little differently. What if genetically engineered crops were allowed to be independently tested, or even required to be independently tested in wide, long-term trials before allowed for human consumption? What if we could be sure that our government was no in bed with the megacorporation pushing to change the entire landscape of our food production system, so we knew that all agricultural viewpoints got fair treatment? What if we could engineer crops to produce more energy efficient biofuels, allowing us to greatly increase plausibility of renewable fuel energy? What if we could engineer crops that could grow in the places where the population exceeds the food production potential of the land? Or we could certainly find some usefulness in a situation like we are facing now with bananas, where the popular Cavendish variety (the only variety suitable for shipping to consumers worldwide in mass amounts) faces possible extinction within the next decade because of wide-spread blights. Would we prefer no bananas, or independently tested, proven safe for human consumption GM bananas?

Biotechnology, and genetic engineering specifically, holds massive potential. The power we have when we're able to manipulate the building blocks of life to act in any way we wish is massive.  As the saying goes, “With great power comes great responsibility.” I don't think the power is being handled very responsibly, but we shouldn't let that sour the potential for great innovations in the biotechnology field.