What’s the deal with genetically engineered food? I read that vast quantities of food crops are being genetically engineered to withstand the effects of herbicides better so that farmers can dump more herbicides in their fields without worrying about crop loss. Jeez. Other crops manufacture their own pesticides so they kill bugs having the temerity to take a bite of them. Doesn’t exactly ring my come-to-dinner bell, ya know?
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
Barely a peep? Inkwise I admit genetic engineering hasn’t ranked up there with Leonardo DiCaprio, but an archive search for the past decade turned up over 500 articles in everything from Time to the Whole Earth Review. True, the subject hasn’t been front-page news, but that’s because little front-page news (e.g., environmental disasters) has occurred. The concern is over what might.
The Frankenstein argument–maybe I should call it the Jurassic Park argument–is that genetic engineers are messing with a process they only dimly understand and by combining pieces of DNA in unnatural ways they’re taking the chance that something will go horribly wrong. This exaggerates the complexity of what genetic engineers do. Gene splicing is ingenious, but the result in most cases is that you cause cells to produce, or fail to produce, a single protein. This is like turning a single bolt in a car. Sure, loosen it too much and an important part of the car might fall off. But generally it’s possible to anticipate, and make allowances for, the things that might go wrong.
