History and Perception of the Media on Genetically Modified Food

Genetic Engineering

Genetically Modified Food

Genetic engineering is one of the breakthroughs in the agricultural sector introduced in the last four decades. Traditionally, agricultural production relied on natural methods such as crossbreeding to achieve the desired plant species. Such methods were associated with disadvantages such as its slow nature and inability to produce the desired plant traits in the desired period. However, the introduction of genetic modification led to the elimination of these barriers. Genetic engineering is faster as compared to the traditional crossbreeding as it involves the extraction of a gene from the desired plant species and introducing into a DNA of different plant. Among the perceived benefits associated with the genetic modified food crops, include having more yields as compared to the conventional food crops, its economic nature, safety for human consumption, and lack of evidence for its harm to the environment. Despite this, the issue of genetic modification of food has faced numerous criticisms in the recent past. Some scholars argue that it has negative effects on the human health and the fact that there is no empirical evidence that suggests its long-term effects on the human health (Hodge, 2009). Therefore, this research paper analyzes the historical perspective/context of the genetically modified food. It also discusses the cultural perspective of the technology alongside the influence the media has over the topic.

Historical development and context of the genetic modification of food

Despite the recent introduction of genetic modification of organisms in the global environment, its history traces its roots throughout the human history. The year 1980 marked the turning point of the technology as scientists found out that certain DNA pieces could be transferred from one plant (organism) to another. This formed the foundation of the whole technology of genetic manipulation of organisms globally. However, the history of genetic modification can be traced back to the prehistoric times of Charles Darwin in the year 1859. Charles Darwin availed the book entitled "the origin of the species" that gave extensive knowledge and information based on breeding at that time. In 1865, Gregor Mendel published findings from his studies concerning breeding of peas. This formed the basis of the modern genetics. In 1869, Fredrich Miescher a scientist discovered the nuclei. He described it as a major component of the DNA. Later, his idea of the nuclei was discovered to carry the DNA trans-scripted information on the features of a species (Cockburn, 2002).

Around 1900, farmers from Britain used yeast and fermentation to introduce the desired hybrid. The gatherers of the food plants found in nature used the technology. In addition, the farmers during this period relied on natural cross breeding to introduce the desired plant species. The system was associated with disadvantages such as its slowed ability to develop the desired species and the fact that the new plants did not have the desired characteristics such as pest and disease resistance (Prakash, 2001). Besides, the European scientists applied the principles of Gregor Mendel theory of genetics to try to manipulate the food crops. According to Mendel's theory of gene selection, crossing a plant with the desired traits with low yielding plant results in the development of a moderately producing crop species. These scientists refereed this technology as "the classical selection of the plant species." Despite the fact that the plants introduced the desired species, it did not produce results such as disease and pest resistance and its time consuming nature. This made it have little differences from the traditional method of cross breeding plants of the same variety to introduce the desired features (Herring, 2006).

In 1902, scientists Theodor Boveri and Walter Sulton proposed that inheritance occurs under the influence of chromosomes. They describe chromosomes as double stranded inside the DNA nuclei. In 1910, Morgan T.H. demonstrated that the chromosomes are the entities that carry genes determining the characteristics of an organism. In the year 1913, Sturtevant came up with the structure of the genetic map. The map showed the constituents of the DNA that play a role in influencing the characteristics of an organism. In the year 1916, Clavin Bridges concurred with Morgan (1910) that inheritance is under the influence of the chromosomes. Muller A.H. showed that X-rays induces genetic mutation and can transform the characteristics of the DNA and the organism in the year 1927. Harriet Creighton and Barbara McClintock brought into the light the idea of DNA recombination in the year 1931. They defined DNA recombination as the process of linking DNA of chromosomes from different plants. They demonstrated using the maize corn chromosomes that showed the ability to be cross-linked with chromosomes of plants from the grass family (Fisher, 1992).

As of 1943, Tatum EL and George Beadle determined the single step in the biochemical pathway of a chromosome that influenced gene expression. This resulted in the discovery of the double helix of the DNA by Francis Crick and James Watson in the year 1952. In the same year, a researcher by the name Norman Borlaug bred the revolutionary idea that later transformed the shape of the global agriculture and research. While working with a project under the sponsorship of the Rockefeller Foundation in conjunction with the Mexican government, he crossed the samples of a sample of fungi resistant wheat with dwarf wheat called the "Norin 10."

Interestingly, it resulted in a genetic merged plant that was rust resistant with thinner, straight, and strong stalks that withstood the load of grain three times than the former without breaking. The Mexican government embraced the technology and witnessed a sixth fold increase in their wheat productivity by the year ending 1963. The news of the technology spread and was later referred in other countries such as India and Pakistan as the "Rht1" technology because it involved crossing of the Rht1 mutant gene with that of the Norin 10 (dwarf wheat variety). Consequently, this gave rise to the "green revolution" (Fisher, 1992).

Franklin Stahl and Matthew Meselson demonstrated the replication nature of the DNA molecule. They defined replication as the process by which the DNA forms a copy of itself. Har Gobind Khorana and Marshall Nirenberg completed unveiling genetic code structure in the year 1966. In 1971, India embraced the green technology from the Mexican government and became one of the leading producers of wheat in Asia by the year 1974. Empirical evidence shows that the progress to the current genetic technology faced hostile resistance from different sectors including the "green movement." This led to scientists such as Rudolph Hess to create a private biodynamic garden at the Auschwitz and Dachu to facilitate the testing of the genetically grown vegetables. In the year 1976, the Asilomar Conference saw the creation of the guidelines on the safety and use of the genetically engineered DNA. This formed the basis of the current genetic engineering (Cockburn, 2002).

The year 1980 marked a milestone in the history of genetic engineering. The U.S. Supreme Court issued the first patent of the genetically modified organisms in this year. It is during this year that specific genes of the DNA could be transferred between organisms. It formed the basis for the genetic modification process. In the year 1982, the FDA approved the first genetically modified organisms. This included the insulin and Humulin developed from genetically engineered E. coli. This made it possible for the spread of the use of the genetically modified food globally (Prakash, 2001). The year 1983 saw the creation of the first trans-genetic plant resistant to antibiotics. The process entailed the use of the tobacco plant to generate antibiotic resistant species. Genetic engineering of cotton and tested in the field in the year 1990 followed the discovery. The year 1983 saw the discovery of the polymerase chain reaction by Karry Mullis. This enabled the scientists to develop ways of reproducing DNA at a faster rate than the previous times. The late 1980's to early 1990's was characterized by the introduction of first sale of genetically modified food from China. This included food crops such as virus resistant tomato and tobacco. Prior to this, the scientists reported a significant development in the field of genetic engineering of food with the production of transgenic maize (Herring, 2006).

Later in the year 1994, scientists developed in vitro fertilization of the maize corn, an intervention that made easy the process of development of new strains of corn plants with the desired characteristics (Prakash, 2001). Ultimately, the genetically modified food entered into the U.S., Europe and the rest of the global market. The year 1995 saw the development of the herbicide immune soybeans also known as "the round-up-ready" by the Monsanto Biotech Company. The dream of genetic modification of food was enhanced in the 2000s with the discovery of the modification process that could allow the introduction of nutrients and vitamins to crop foods to enrich their value. Three years later, the scientists discovered the mutation behavior of the Bt-toxin caterpillar cum moth that developed resistance to pesticides over the last ten years of introduction of the technology. This resulted in the adoption of alternatives to respond to the emergence of new strains of organisms resistant to the chemicals (Finucane & Holup, 2005).

Today, genetically modification of food has advanced across the globe. Statistical analysis shows that about 8.25 million farmers grew genetic modified food in 2005. They are expected to triple by 2015. In terms of market share, the soybeans account for approximately 60% of the genetically modified food, maize 23%, cotton, 11%, and canola accounting for approximately 6% of the global crop production. Country wise, the U.S. is the leading proponents of the advancement of the genetic engineering of food and animals. This implies that the U.S. leads in the integration of the genetic engineering technology and supply of genetically engineered food globally (Hodge, 2009).

Cultural context of genetic Engineering of food and other organisms

It is highly recognizable that the introduction of genetic engineering has stimulated heated debates on its dangers to the society. Most of the discussions focus on the effects of the technology to the agricultural sector. The debates extend to the cultural field as seen in one of the commentary features in one of the dailies in Germany, where it stated, "it is ultimately clear that genetic modified food has created cultural differences between the Americans and the Europeans." The long-term effects of genetically engineered organisms remain unpredicted. Sociologists consider that the success of genetic engineering will give rise to impetus and unsettling tendencies that will pose a significant threat to the cultural contexts of the global society. The manipulative treatment used by the technology and the breeding of monocultures that rely on the drug driven medicine is likely to replace the social and environmental policy. This will affect the cultural stability of the global society. Genetic engineering will replace the social and environmental policies of sustainability leading to the development of human beings considered optimally adapted to the environment. This will result in social problems that degrade the cultural values and sustainability (Kynda, 2004).

The fact that the technology has been associated with fewer risks to the human life and the environment, sociologists, raise fictitious scenarios associated with the technology that might affect the natural biodiversity. This includes fictitious hazards such as the increased likelihood of the uncontrolled release of infectious viruses, bacterium of plant species that could increase the risks of ecological damage. This leads to the creation of the belief that genetic engineering is postulated to have a negative impact to the global society as the nuclear power. It is recognizable that genetic engineering provides an alternative for treating diseases affecting human beings. This raises the moral question of whether if doing so is "right or wrong." The idea of selective breeding raises the cultural concerns on the overall implications of the process to the society as a whole (Herring, 2006).

The acceptance of genetic engineering of food varies significantly across different cultures. The variation is influenced by an individual's perception, knowledge of the genetically modified food, and the perceived benefits or risks associated with the genetically modified food. A survey conducted by, Conner, Glare, & Nap (2003) to determine the perception of the Chinese population showed that they feared most the increased risk of the technology to the environment. They feared the risks of the technology interfering with the cultural stability and loss of the concrete nature. Besides, the population feared the risks of the technology to the environment. This included the loss of the cultural values and beliefs on certain food considered having cultural value to the society. As a result, they strive to establish equilibrium between the perceived negative effects to the culture as well as their health and the environment (Hodge, 2009).

The introduction of the genetically modified food is likely to promote monopoly in the agricultural markets. The corporations involved in the production of this food create monopolies using traditional breeding practices. This forces the farmers to purchase new seeds from these corporations on a yearly basis, thereby, creating a sense of monopoly in the global market. According to Finucane & Holup (2005), genetic modification of organisms promotes technicism. Technicism refers to the basic scientific attitude of having control over reality and solving the natural problems using scientific-technological methods. This raises cultural concerns as increased technicism from the adoption of the genetic engineering deprives societies the autonomy to have control over their reality. Human nature seeks for victory over the unprecedented events in the future. This results in the neglect of the basic cultural values that guide human beings in the daily decision making processes (Fisher, 1992).

The increased adoption of the genetic engineering of organisms reduces and dehumanizes relationships within the society. This fragments the social structures that are central to the maintenance of cultural sustainability. According to the systems theory, genetic engineering causes numerous problems that include environmental, resources and energy crises alongside promoting human alienation (Kynda, 2004). Genetic engineering is a cultural activity, and scientific metaphors are embedded within the cultural values and ethical frameworks. Genetic engineering influences the relationships between human beings and other species. The technology changes human cultural and ethical assumptions about the reality. This implies that increasing over reliance on the technology will result in the naturalistic fallacy constructed on scientific bases. In addition, technology systems such as genetic engineering are embodied in ethics of social conduct. This creates a strong relationship between the technology and social issues such as equity, and social justice that influence directly socio-cultural values (Fisher, 1992).

Genetic engineering of organisms raises three key sets of cultural concerns. Firstly is the concern for other species. This includes issues related to the integrity and intrinsic worth of other species that the form the key values guiding the conservation of biodiversity. Secondly, the environmental concern for the need for the conservation of the ecosystem and sustainable utilization of the available resources, which underpin cultural values. Thirdly is the concern for social justice in terms of access to the natural resources that represent the social culture. Despite the above cultural challenges associated with genetic engineering, it is appreciable that it forms the basis of genetic research into cultural issues associated with it. It shapes the culture of the society by eliminating inequalities and challenges such as poverty through the increased availability of food products to the population (Conner, Glare, & Nap, 2003).