Analysis Of Genetically Modified Food: Good, Bad, Ugly By Arthur Capmo

The “Genetically Modified Food: Good, Bad, Ugly” by Arthur L. Caplan talks about how customers do not have any information of what the food that is being consume is made from and this may consequences for the consumers in the long run because of not knowing what chemicals are being used in the production of each part of the food. As you read this article, the author emphasized on a key problem for businesses that they need to label their products that contain genetically modified organisms also called GMOs. Farmers’ income is also impacted when their animals die and the vegetables and fruits are being harm because of the chemicals it contains. The main problem with GMOs is that they are harmful to everyone who consumes them, but he stated
However, if there is no intervention to try to stop the businesses from using GMOs from the government or for the community that are having this enormous problem, then the businesses do not have any motives to stop using it. Therefore, the author is trying to make this point stand out in the article. The author also recognizes other complications in which that the Organic Consumers Association states that, “Calves are born too weak to walk, with enlarged joints and limb deformities. Piglets experience rapidly deteriorating health, a ‘failure to thrive’ so severe that they start breaking down their own tissues and organs self-cannibalizing—to survive.” This is a logos statement which emphasizes on the author’s opinion on the persuasion of the search for the truth which is conversation. This with no hesitation apprehend the reader’s attention as it suggests that businesses only wanted to make a profit and how they can invest money, but how they do not care what the end result of their products is and what the long-term consequence of their product may have on individuals
However, the author accuses Westgate for concealing this data from the community. Which identifies a little persuasion that it might be better to not purchase anything at all but instead to plant their own crops so that it will echo in their health that better option is to harvest your own food than to rely on a product that are not beneficial at all. Also, the author states that Monsanto (pg. 408-410), the CEO of the company, produced or invented a form of growing hormone just to increase the production of milk but did not thought of the consequences that is made have on people in the future. This demonstrations that companies can change from manufacturing one product to another and they do not care of the damaging consequence it may have on the consumers body. The author wanted the reader to understand his main opinion that the more you stay away from can goods, or read up on businesses to learn more about what they use in their products, the better it is for individuals.
In the article, the author is successful in giving a big picture of the chemicals large businesses are putting in their food and what may be the reason for disease to develop. However, I disagree with the author’s way of just listing places of where it could be affected. He could have first given more information on GMOS; rather than giving suggestions on what