Genetically Modified Foods Ethics

Comstock gives key questions that we should ask when trying to access the potential harms associated with genetically modified foods. He portrays his many reasons as to why it is ethically justifiable to pursue genetically modified crops and foods through intrinsic and extrinsic objections, theories (Rights, Utilitarian, Virtue) and via technology going deeper in explaining his reasons using experiments and the precautionary response. I agree with Comstock and defend his reasons in concluding that it is ethically justifiable to pursue genetically modified crops and foods.
Potential harms are associated with genetically modified foods and the key questions Comstock (2001) suggest we ask when trying to access such is, what is the trauma that is envisaged? In other words, how significant and who’s benefiting from such situations and is the case fair and just or is one group being harmed more than another. What kind of data do we have? Do we not have enough information and are we missing something important that we should know? Another key question important is our options. When it comes
The intrinsic objection is the, “Process of making GMOs is objectionable in itself” (Comstock, 2001, p. 487). This notion portrays the view of GM crops and foods as not ‘natural.’ The adoption of GMOs may result in potential harm according to the extrinsic objection (Comstock, 2001, p. 487). These two objections bring up the negative within genetically modified foods and in this case, these are considered “bad” and the “risks.” Alternatively, the positive is based on the fact that people have the right to choose to embrace GM technology and the discovery allows for safer and better results. The technology has many benefits that overcome the risks, providing higher quality foods. This brings about the arguments of what is ethically justified, and how in the end, the good overcomes the