Paper #5
English 134
On the first day of school, I was proud to step onto the Cal Poly campus as an adult, having celebrated my eighteenth birthday a few days prior. It was a culmination of eighteen long years of adolescence[SM1], bringing me forthright[SM2] into the responsibilities and privileges of adulthood. In my mind, the ability to buy tobacco and adult magazines were among the most relevant of these liberties, but according to Cal Poly, the right to vote outweighed the lure of nude women and cigarettes. I couldn’t walk through campus without being bombarded with registration and information packets. Government agents[SM3] were stationed at every street corner ready to put me in the system. The message was clear, “get educated, and vote!”. With my newfound sense of adult responsibility, I decided to take an active role in learning the issues. Being from a farm town,[SM4] one issue stood out among the rest, and that was the initiative to ban genetic modification in San Luis Obispo. After researching the topic, I found the results pertinent to every San Luis Obispo consumer.
The initiative called for all genetically modified crops, or GM crops, to be banned from all of San Luis Obispo County. Supporters of the ban likened genetic modification to alien invaders, scouring the purity of all organic life. The injunction would have not only halted any growing of GM food, but also would have put the breaks[SM5] on any biotech research in genetic modification. Opponents of the ban feared that some of the wording in the ordinance might have led to the prohibition of the production of medicines, industrial cleaners and other non-agricultural items created through genetic engineering techniques. If it had been passed, all regulation would be left in the hands of the Agricultural Commissioner of San Luis Obispo County, who normally regulates pest management and pesticide use. After much consideration, I was ready to take part in the democratic process of voting. The measure failed 61% to 39%. I imagined a huge line drawn across the city and 2/5 of the population standing on the opposite side. I felt that GM foods signified a perfect example of technological benefit and could not understand why the measure had the support of even 39% of voters. This provoked me to do more in depth research[SM6].
In order to make a decision on the issue I had to first understand Genetic Modification. I found that there are many techniques of genetic modification that the United States have been utilizing[SM7] for years. In fact, many genetic modifications have been used since the beginning of modern agriculture. Selective planting-using [SM8]the seed of a crop that yielded the best product the time before- was the first form of genetic engineering. In the twentieth century, Gregor Mendel created the technique of selective breeding by experimenting with peas. Farmers take different alleles present in a species gene pool and shift them to create different varieties (Nottingham 5). The different varieties produce crops that are higher in yield, more resistant to bacteria and even[SM9] better tasting. Another example of genetic modification that has been around since the 1800s is the process of fermentation. In this process, enzyme-producing microbes are mixed with a substance and the enzymes cause different chemical reactions. These chemical reactions change the makeup of the substance’s DNA creating a more desirable species. Clearly, genetic modification is by no means the frightening new science experiment that critics make it out to be[SM10].
Today, genetic engineering is one of the most advanced technologies around. According to http://thinkquest.org, there are three types of genetic engineering, Plasmid, Vector and Boilistic. The Plasmid method is used to alter the genome of bacteria. After treating [SM11]two strands of bacteria with a restriction enzyme, they are stuck together much like two pieces of tape. This modified bacteria is inserted into plant or animals for a desired effect. The Vector method is exactly like the Plasmid method except after the bacteria are stuck together it[SM12] is treated with a viral vector so it can synthesize and reproduce. Finally, the Boilistic method, or gene gun method, is performed by firing pellets coated with the desirable DNA at plant cells. The cells absorb the DNA and are allowed to reproduce. All of these modifications are designed to increase yield, heighten resistance and improve quality of crops. The versatility is only limited by the imaginations of the engineers.
After learning about Genetic Modification I was able to analyze the arguments of critics[SM13]. These skeptics only offer poor arguments that are easily refuted. Many people fear that GM foods will produce “superpests”, [SM14]a name for plants that become crossbred with GM crops. This however is easily preventable; many GM crops are made sterile so they cannot pollinate other plants. Also, organic foods are sectioned[SM15] to be a certain distance away from modified crops as to prevent cross contamination. Allergies are also a potential problem. For example if a fish was genetically engineered with enzymes from peanuts to make it bigger or more resistant, a person who is allergic to peanuts may have a reaction from eating the fish. These isolated incidents are easily preventable through the use of labels on GM foods. Just as a box of cereal shows you the ingredients, a genetically modified apple will show its modifiers. A popular issue today is one of semantics. Many fear that GM crops are not “natural”. [SM16]This idea is wrong. The book Designer foods puts it best,”Who decides what is ‘natural’? In almost every way, what we call natural is a social construction- in other words, a judgment at a particular time and by a particular culture.”(Pence 4). The words “organic” and “all natural” are used a lot these days. In reality, the same crop that is labeled organic or natural can be grown using harmful pesticides. Many people don’t know that government regulations allow for certain chemicals to be used in organic farming.
It is easy to see that the benefits of GM foods are wide ranging. GM foods allow us to hurdle the problems associated with environmental disasters. In 2002 in Africa, droughts and flash flooding caused crop production to fail, putting nearly 15 million people at risk for starvation (Pringle 184). With GM crops given by the U.N., designed to be more resistant to harsh environments, thousands of people were able to get food. GM foods also lead to a reduced amount of harmful pesticides in food. Crops that are genetically engineered to be better resistant to pests need fewer pesticides to be produced. No [SM17]longer will a traveler gaze over the many scenic vineyards and orchards in San Luis Obispo and see a plane spreading a mist of deadly chemicals. With better technology, GM crops will soon be able to increase the sustainability of the earth. According to Norman Borlaug, with GM foods, “ we will be able to produce enough food in 2025 without expanding the area under cultivation [to feed the 8.3 billion people living on earth].”(Pence 165).
This measure[SM18], in many ways would have been very harmful to San Luis Obispo agriculture. First to be affected by the ban[SM19], would have been the economy. The farming business, chugging along like a toy engine would be derailed from its tracks. Since the ban would only be for this county, neighboring counties would have no qualms about growing genetically modified crops and selling them for lower prices here in our city. Imagine a San Luis Obispo where the most profitable crop, the wine grape, is no longer successful. San Luis Obispo contains over 3000 acres of vineyards that would be crippled by such an injunction. Places like Baileyana Winery located in the Edna Valley, a fertile stretch of land bordering both the Santa Lucia and San Luis mountain ranges, would have to stop using French clones to increase yield. These wineries would be devastated by the cost of both compliance with the measure and competition from other counties. Those affected would include the farmers, consumers and eventually the city. The measure is also economically unsound because it prevents any further research of genetic modification in the medical field. This prevents any potential revenue from future breakthroughs. The measure would create controversy for the university as well. Since it sits on state owned land, the ban would not apply to Cal Poly. Cal poly has over 70 acres of productive crops only a portion of which is organic. The school would be able to grow GM foods and sell them for lower prices. This would create tension causing the farmers to feel discriminated against.
Although the measure did not pass, this is still a prevalent issue for San Luis Obispo. This[SM20] ban will not be the last of its kind to be seen on the city[SM21] ballot. That is why it is important to learn the facts, and see the truth that GM foods lend to the improvement of humanity. Prohibiting genetically modified organism is not only an economically unsound decision but it is also socially inept[SM22]. Genetic modification has been around for generations and has proven it’s[SM23] worth time and time again. Sustainability is going to be the key to the future of life on earth. Genetic engineering is the guiding light shining through into our dark future. So next time there is an initiative concerning genetic modification, support GM foods. And when you gaze across the hill-studded landscape to see the crop rows lining the terrain, you will know that you are seeing the perfect symbiosis of technology and agriculture[SM24].[MSOffice25]
Lurquin, Paul F. High Tech Harvest. Boulder: Westview Press, 2002.
Nottingham, Stephan. Eat your Genes. New York: Zed Books Ltd., 1998
Pence, Gregory E. Designer Food. Cumnor Hill: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002
Pringle, Peter. Food Inc. Mendel to Monsanto- The
Promises and Perils of the Biotech
Harvest. New York : Simon & Schuster, 2003.
<< http://www.sanluisobispo.com/mld/sanluisobispo/business/9552651.htm>>
Author Unkown. “Genetic Engineering methods”
<< http://library.thinkquest.org/C004367/be9.shtml>>
<< http://www.baileyana.com/home.htm>>
Page:
1
[SM1]Check
this
Page:
1
[SM2]wrong
word, delete
Page:
1
[SM3]more like
advocates for various positions
Page:
1
[SM4]dangling
modifier
Page:
1
[SM5]spelling
Page:
1
[SM6]engaging
personal narrative mixed with clear explanation of the issue and its history.
Page:
1
[SM7]awkward
Page:
1
[SM8]double
hyphen for dash
Page:
1
[SM9]delete
Page:
2
[SM10]excellent
concluding sentence, deferring topic sentence to end of paragraph
Page:
2
[SM11]dangling
modifier
Page:
2
[SM12]clarify
shift from plural to singular
Page:
2
[SM13]good
transition
Page:
2
[SM14]commas
and periods inside closing quotation marks
Page:
2
[SM15]unclear
Page:
2
[SM16]
Page:
2
[SM17]phrase
missing: If they are used here
Page:
3
[SM18]no
comma
Page:
3
[SM19]no
comma
Page:
3
[SM20]echo
Page:
3
[SM21]county
Page:
3
[SM22]good
phrase
Page:
3
[SM23]no
apostrophe
Page:
3
[SM24]Daniel: This is an impressive piece—a fine
culmination of a first college writing class and a fitting part of your passage
to adulthood. The information has
been fully digested and clearly presented. The voice of the author is confident and capable , the
appeal is passionate but not hysterical or sarcastic. The treatment of counter arguments is plausible. It merits publication, not only on the
class website, but in any venue—once the minor glitches noted have been
corrected. Please resend for final
revision of grade. A-
Page:
3
[MSOffice25]
Ok.. here it is. First, you said the intro was a little long. I had some people
read it and they all felt that the intro was relevant, and I like it too so I
left it.
Second you told me to put a more description of places so I added the part about the winery and cal poly land. I figure that is enough considering the whole issue stems from san Luis Obispo.
Lastly I fixed a number of other errors I found with more editing.
Thanx, Dan