Annotated Bibliography Final Draft Jordan Newbould

ENGL-1010
Onwuzuruoha
5/1/17
Introduction: Summary of Issue
From the research that I've gathered I've concluded there are three different stakeholders in this
argument these stakeholders are; the large manufacturers and distributors of genetically modified
foods, the farmers, and the consumers. Each of the different sources that I explored expanded on
these stakeholders and their multiple perspectives on GMOs. From my research I wanted to
explore how genetically modified food are produced, whether we should label and regulate
GMOs and the true impact they have on our bodies.

Proposed Research Question: How are genetically modified foods produced in Utah? What are
its regulations in the United States (specifically Utah) and other countries? How do genetically
modified foods impact our bodies and should we label GMOs?
First Annotated Bibliography
Doubts about the Promised Bounty of Genetically Modified Crops Danny Hakim, Oct.
29th, 2016 https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/30/business/gmo-promise-falls-short.html?
_r=0 (Hakim)

Hakim, an investigative reporter in The York Times, discusses that through extensive
examination genetically modification has not increased crop yields or led to an overall reduction
in the use of chemical pesticides. Genetic modification makes promises to be immune to the
effects of weed killers and resistant to pests, soon these crops will become indispensable to
feeding the worlds vastly growing population, as well as fewer applications of pesticides.
Europe largely was rejecting genetically modified foods at the same time the United States and
Canada were both embracing it. Profound differences over genetic engineering have split
Americans and Europeans for decades. Pesticides are toxins by design, and have been linked to
developmental delays and cancer. The industry is winning on both sides because the same
companies make and sell both the genetically modified crops/plants and pesticides. Hakim
explains that Monsanto had cherry-picked its data to reflect positively on the industry saying a
farmer is not going to pay for technology if it does not provide major benefit. Joseph Kovach,
says the goal of herbicide resistant seeds was to sell more product more herbicide. Hakim
explains that, to the naked eye, the seeds look identical inside the differences are profound.
Hakim elaborates on Monsantos role in helping meet food demands of these added billions to
our population. Also, Monsanto highlighted comparisons between Nebraska and France whereas
 Annotated Bibliography Final Draft Jordan Newbould
ENGL-1010
Onwuzuruoha
5/1/17
other states had unfavorable yields.

I believe this article focuses on Hakims views on genetically modified crops, he makes claims
about genetically modified foods not leading to an increase in crop yield and reduction in
chemical pesticides. He claims the industrys place is to fulfill the needs of our immensely
growing population through meeting their own marketing opportunities. I believe he backs up his
claims by making comparisons of views on genetically modified foods between Europe and the
United States. For farmers its not a simple choice. I think Hakim makes opposing arguments that
genetically modified foods can be effective, and claim to do many things such as protecting
against crop diseases and making food more nutritious, some may be effective, some not. In the
end, Hakim does not agree with Monsantos views on genetically modified crops being
beneficial and providing the bounty that the industry claims.

Second Annotated Bibliography

Monsanto, on Genetically Modified Crops, Robert T Fraley, Executive Vice President and
Chief Technology Officer, Monsanto Company, Nov, 11th, 2016
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/12/opinion/monsanto-on-genetically-modified-
crops.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FGenetically%20Modified
%20Food&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics&region=stream&module=stream_
unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=4&pgtype=collection (Fraley)

In a reply to Doubt about a Promised Bounty Fraley makes opposing arguments from
Monsantos side of the argument. Fraley claims that farmers are smart business people who
dont waste time or money on tools that dont deliver results he says these farmers are choosing
to invest in GMO seeds because they are seeing better harvests. Fraley claims that farmers have
seen many benefits using G.M crops that range from efficient weed and insect control, reduced
insecticides reduced erosion, and improved soil. In the United States, genetically modified
crops has seen an increase in yield by 28% for soybeans and 32% for corn. Lastly, Fraley claims
G.M.O is an essential tool for modern and sustainable agriculture saying the voice of a farmer
should be represented.
 Annotated Bibliography Final Draft Jordan Newbould
ENGL-1010
Onwuzuruoha
5/1/17
Fraley makes claims about the benefits of G.M.O to produce more food sustainability. Fraley
said that G.M.O is vital part of meeting the increasingly global demand for food. Fraley outlines
that G.M crops have an increased yield, and it benefits including improved soil, efficient weed
control and reduced use of insecticide, Fraley states that nearly 20 million farmers choose to
invest in genetically modified seeds, because farmers are seeing better harvests

Both articles present separate viewpoints and claims to the possible risks and benefits of
genetically modified foods. Hakim argues that genetically modified crops are not leading to an
increase in crops yield and reduction of insecticides. Fraley responds to this article making
opposing claims that G.M crops have an increased yield, improvements in soil, weed control and
reductions in insecticides. Fraley claims this is the real story for how farmers are meeting the
global demand for food using G.M seeds. However, Hakim claims that Monsanto will only go
where the market and customers demand their products and technology and G.M.Os will not be
the answer for sustainable and promised bounty.
Word Count: 758

Four Additional Annotated Bibliographies Entries

1. Genetic Science Learning Center. (2013, July 15) Genetically Modified Foods. Retrieved
April 04, 2017, from http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/science/gmfoods/ (Society)

This article shared 3 basic headings: genetically modified foods, genetically modified: what
exactly are we talking about, and benefits versus risks of genetically modified plants. The first
section discussed our ability to manipulate plants by producing new genes promises innovative
solutions to these and many other real-world problems. (Society) Genetic engineering offers a
time saving solution to producing crops faster and in larger quality with less effort and expense.
Yet what are the risks of changing the genetic makeup of these consumed products? Technology
now allows us to transfer genes between organisms. (Society) One the desired traits are
identified it can be introduced into the target plant to create a new strain from each generation.
Benefits and risk include: cross breeding with wild plant populations that rely on pollen and
 Annotated Bibliography Final Draft Jordan Newbould
ENGL-1010
Onwuzuruoha
5/1/17
insects to breed and produce and offspring. When farmers no longer grow their old variety of
non-GMO sources, these desirable traits are lost along with other useful genes. Despite the
conflict surround them genetically modified plants have taken root on our planet. As consumers,
we are responsible to be informed about GMOs to make decisions about their use and
regulation.

This source helped me to reflect on the 3 different stakeholders for this issue: the consumers, the
FDA, and the farmers, and what role each of them have in our GMO process. Though genetic
engineering offers a chance at a sustainable society it could also result in cross-breeding with
wild populations and allergic reactions to various food items, as the consumer its our
responsibility to acquire knowledge of these processed GMO foods and to avoid any foods that
would be harmful for our bodies.

Word Count: 290

Food, Inc. By Robert Kenner, Robert Kenner, Robert Kenner, Richard Pearce, Eric
Schlosser, Eric Schlosser, Melissa Robledo, William Pohlad, Jeff Skoll, Robin Schorr, Diane
Weyermann, Elise Pearlstein, Elise Pearlstein, Kim Roberts, Kim Roberts, Michael Pollan,
Michael Pollan, Gary Hirshberg, Joel Salatin, and Mark Adler. Dir. Richard Pearce. N.p.,
n.d. Web. (Kenner)

I watched Food Inc. earlier today to gain perspective from the viewpoint of the consumers and
farmers. Some highlights from the film include: The food industry doesnt want you to know
the truth about what you are eating because if you did you might not eat it- its a world
deliberately hidden from us (Kenner) While, the average grocery store has 47,000 products
which make it look like theres variety of choice, but really there are only a few major companies
and few major crops involved. At the supermarket candy, chips, and soda are all cheaper than
produce. The biggest predictor of obesity is income level (Kenner) this has led to a system of
modern agriculture that is all about doing things faster, bigger, and cheaper. In 1970 the top 5
beef packers controlled 25% of the market, now the top 4 beef packers control 80% of the
market (Kenner) Chickens are raised in half the time they were in the 1950s but in half the time
 Annotated Bibliography Final Draft Jordan Newbould
ENGL-1010
Onwuzuruoha
5/1/17
they ended up twice as big due to antibiotics. A Tyson chicken farmer from the documentary said
the chickens never see sunlight and are kept inside day and night with no windows. They
slaughter 32000 pigs per day (2000 and hour) and employees get infections from handling the
meat too often. The government is dominated by the industries it is supposed to be regulating.
(Kenner)

This film helped me to reflect on consumers and farmers aspects of genetically modified foods.
The average consumer feels powerless because they have to choose between cheaper alternatives
on non-organic foods. I think the food industry only delivers to the marketplace what the
marketplace demands. I believe this starts with the consumers, choosing foods that are
seasonable, local, and organic and reading labels when you go to the grocery store to change
your body with every bite of food you eat.

Word Count: 311

Brassard, Susan. "Dangers of GMO Foods." LIVESTRONG.COM. Leaf Group, 31 May

2015. Web. 08 Apr. 2017. http://www.livestrong.com/article/216714-dangers-of-gmo-foods/
(Brassard)

Genetically modified, or GMO foods, are crops grown from seeds engineered to increase yield
at lower production costs (Brassard) Proponents of GM foods say that higher yields and lower
production costs and improved nutritional content are needs to ensure a sustainable food supply
for the worlds growing population. Opponents to GM crops claims these benefits are not
adequately proved and the real potential danger is to human health and the environment for
reasons to ban GMOs The rise in autoimmune diseases, infertility, gastrointestinal problems
and chronic diseases may be associated with the introduction of GM foods. (Brassard)
Genetically modified seeds are purchased as a patented product customers have to sign
agreement for use with the seed manufacturer. Concerns about the food supply and safety
continues to escalate as GM seeds become more renowned. Most GMO seeds are genetically
engineered to be herbicide tolerate, resistant to insect infestation and disease. (Brassard) GM
 Annotated Bibliography Final Draft Jordan Newbould
ENGL-1010
Onwuzuruoha
5/1/17
crops may encourage farmers to increase their use of herbicides and pesticides, which will raise
human consumption of potential dangerous toxins.

This article helped to reflect on the potential risks to human health and the environment as
consequences of genetically engineered products. I believe that independent safety testing and
labeling of all food items containing genetically modified products is necessary, despite the U.S
not requiring food manufactures to identify foods produced with GMOs. Genetically engineered
seeds are identical in shape and structure and are made to be resistant of insects, disease, and
infestation. However, GM crops manufacture their own pesticides as well, which can further put
poisons in our body systems and the soil that can cause unforeseen changes to our environment.
Another concern is cross-contamination of GMO plants that may harm other organisms such as
caterpillars, bees, and birds, which are vital for our ecosystem to thrive.

Word Count: 301

Worland, Justin. "GMO Food Doesn't Harm Human Health, Report Says." Time. Time, 16
May 2016. Web. 08 Apr. 2017. (Worland) http://time.com/4338702/gmo-human-health-
safety-genetically-modified-crops/

Genetically engineered crops pose no additional risks to humans and the environment when
compared to conventional crops. (Worland) The report suggests, widespread use of genetically
modified crops has contributed to concerning the levels of pesticide resistance in weeds and
insects. Creating a vicious cycle for farmers to continually spray for more resistance. The report
comes as public health and environmental advocates continue to push for mandatory labeling of
GMOs. The report is unlikely to stop calls for labeling that have already succeed in some states
and led food manufactures like Who Foods to promise to curtail their use of genetically modified
ingredients. (Worland) Committee members from the report hoped that the findings would fuel
an evidence based discussion on the heated debated topic of GMOs

Worland made additional claims that GM crops pose no risk to human health and the
environment. Genetic engineering has helped agriculture producers in the U.S and farmers thrive
according to the report. Though these products are engineered to be resistant of pesticides,
 Annotated Bibliography Final Draft Jordan Newbould
ENGL-1010
Onwuzuruoha
5/1/17
concerning levels of resistance is weeds and insects continues to grow. Researchers behind the
report called for evaluating the health and environmental risks associated with new types of
crops introduces whether theyre genetically engineered or not. Some food manufactures make
promises to label their food ingredients in hopes of increasing the amount of consumers.
However, this report should not settle the debate on GMOs, but it raises concerns for our 3 main
stakeholders the consumers, the large manufacturers, and the farmers.
Word Count: 266
2 Additional Annotated Bibliographies

Lynas, Mark. "Opinion | With G.M.O. Policies, Europe Turns Against Science." The New
York Times. The New York Times, 24 Oct. 2015. Web. 15 Apr. 2017. (Lynas)
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/25/opinion/sunday/with-gmo-policies-europe-turns-
against-science.html

17 European Countries within the European Union announced rules to ban the cultivation of
genetically modified crops. Lynas argues these probations expose the worry of how far Europe
has come to set itself against modern science. Scotlands probation began on August 9th 2015, as
of European scientists and farmers watched other countries, following these same guidelines.
Nicola Sturgeon, the leader of the Scottish National Party and committee admitted that the first
ministers came to the decision not based on scientific evidence but rather the priority to protect
the clean green image of the countrys produce. Yet this inconvenient truth on GMOs that
theyre as safe as conventionally cultivated food, is ignored when ideological interests are
threated. (Lynas) The crop biotech sector in Europe is dying The European Academics
Science Advisory Council is worried that the E.U has different goals for science and innovation.
In addition the council is worried Europes GMOs phobia may slam the door for new
technologies. Europe imports over 30 million tons of soy and corn based animal feeds. Import
are preferred to European crops party because biotech traits make them cheaper. (Lynas) Argues
that Europeans are risking a critically important technology that employs humanity to feed itself
sustainably in an increasingly difficult and challenging future.
Mark Lynas is the political director for the Cornell Alliance for Science at Cornell University
and a co-author, most recently, of An Ecomodernist Manifesto.
 Annotated Bibliography Final Draft Jordan Newbould
ENGL-1010
Onwuzuruoha
5/1/17
Lynas made claims about the benefits of the genetically modified crops and had a biased view on
Europes new adaptation to banning the cultivation of genetically modified foods. I think that
European countries may have these adaptions for more than just maintaining a green image but
a healthy image. Lynas made claims that Europe has chosen chemistry over biology. Lynas
argues that we are witnessing a historic injustice perpetrated by the well fed on the food
insecure. I think that many Europeans have adapted different beliefs on the true benefits GMOs
bring.

Word Count: 352

"Opinion | When Food Is Genetically Modified." The New York Times. The New York
Times, 30 Oct. 2015. Web. 15 Apr. 2017.
In response to Mark Lynass Europe Turns against Science Crispin makes opposing arguments
to his claims. Genetic engineering is a technology. Each product of technology will be different;
and because theyre different they may contain unique unintended and unexpected changes,
safety of each one must be assessed thoroughly. (CRISPIN TAYLOR) And the World Health
Organization agrees: Different G.M organisms include different genes inserted in different
ways. Many claims about the safety of genetically engineering products therefore seem absurd.
This furthered use of science based procedures to regulate the risk and benefits of all agriculture
technologies and products that use GMOs. The use of G.E plants represents an importance of
advancement in agriculture that builds on human development as it does for each species of
plant. G.E crops can provide substantial net environmental benefits compared with non G.E
crops. These benefits include reduction in soil erosion, nutritionally enhanced food and
substantially reductions in the amount of insecticides and farm workers that are exposed to and
released to the environment each day. (CRISPIN TAYLOR) Although sovereign countries
review and regulate G.E crops we strongly urge all countries to integrate the best available
scientific information into their policies.
I think that Crispin reflects on the benefits that genetically crops can bring instead of having a
biased view towards Europes new polices. He does agree with everything that Lynas said in the
previous article. Despite this Crispin made some effective claims that the safety of each G.M
crops must be investigated. Having genetically engineered crops himself Crispin makes claims of
that GMOs are essential for sustainable society.
 Annotated Bibliography Final Draft Jordan Newbould
ENGL-1010
Onwuzuruoha
5/1/17
Conclusion
There are many different viewpoints of the perspectives of GMOs. I have learned many different
perspectives from looking at the various angles of this topic. From this research that Ive
conducted I want to conclude in saying that I believe genetically modified food has many
benefits and risks. Genetically modified crops will provide a substantial amount of sustainable
food for our society and other cultures. The farmers have the choice to grow organically or with
the use of G.M products. These farmers use G.M.O because theyll see a higher production in
yield, better soil quality. Though others fear the health risks associates with GM products when it
comes down to the bottom line, I believe it is up to us as the consumers to make challenging
decisions to choose what they want to purchase at the grocery store, and the type of food that
they should put in their bodies. Personally, I feel that genetically modified food and crops should
have mandatory labeling and regulations. Because people have a right to know what theyre
putting in their body.
Overall Word Count: 2933

Cited Sources

Brassard, Susan. "Dangers of GMO Foods." LIVESTRONG.COM. Leaf Group, 31 May

2015. Web. 08 Apr. 2017. http://www.livestrong.com/article/216714-dangers-of-gmo-foods/
(Brassard)

"Opinion | When Food Is Genetically Modified." The New York Times. The New York
Times, 30 Oct. 2015. Web. 15 Apr. 2017. (CRISPIN TAYLOR)

Monsanto, on Genetically Modified Crops, Robert T Fraley, Executive Vice President and
Chief Technology Officer, Monsanto Company, Nov, 11th, 2016
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/12/opinion/monsanto-on-genetically-modified-
crops.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FGenetically%20Modified
%20Food&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics&region=stream&module=stream_
unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=4&pgtype=collection (Fraley)
 Annotated Bibliography Final Draft Jordan Newbould
ENGL-1010
Onwuzuruoha
5/1/17
Doubts about the Promised Bounty of Genetically Modified Crops Danny Hakim, Oct.
29th, 2016 https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/30/business/gmo-promise-falls-short.html?
_r=0 (Hakim)
Food, Inc. By Robert Kenner, Robert Kenner, Robert Kenner, Richard Pearce, Eric
Schlosser, Eric Schlosser, Melissa Robledo, William Pohlad, Jeff Skoll, Robin Schorr, Diane
Weyermann, Elise Pearlstein, Elise Pearlstein, Kim Roberts, Kim Roberts, Michael Pollan,
Michael Pollan, Gary Hirshberg, Joel Salatin, and Mark Adler. Dir. Richard Pearce. N.p.,
n.d. Web. (Kenner)

Lynas, Mark. "Opinion | With G.M.O. Policies, Europe Turns Against Science." The New
York Times. The New York Times, 24 Oct. 2015. Web. 15 Apr. 2017. (Lynas)
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/25/opinion/sunday/with-gmo-policies-europe-turns-
against-science.html

Genetic Science Learning Center. (2013, July 15) Genetically Modified Foods. Retrieved
April 04, 2017, from http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/science/gmfoods/ (Society)

Worland, Justin. "GMO Food Doesn't Harm Human Health, Report Says." Time. Time, 16
May 2016. Web. 08 Apr. 2017. (Worland) http://time.com/4338702/gmo-human-health-
safety-genetically-modified-crops/