The introduction of genetically modified crops is a highly controversial topic in the UK, parts of Europe and in other parts of the world. The possibility of these genetically altered crops forming a large proportion of the plants grown by farmers in the US and Europe within the next decade has brought forth many reactions ranging from outrage and anger, and unease. The introduction of the crops however has been greeted with near-indifference by consumers in the US and Canada.
There are three main types of principle that are relevant to the evaluation of policies or
practices:
Will the technology promote the general welfare by making for improved food safety or
reducing the use of chemical pesticides in agriculture? Or does the technology pose
unknown risks for consumers and the environment that we would be wise not to run if
we are concerned about the general welfare?
• What implications does the technology have for the rights of consumers, for example
the right to be informed about the food one is eating?
• What implications does it have for the rights of scientists to be free to conduct their
research in ways that protect their intellectual integrity?
• Finally, we can ask questions derived from a concern with the principle of justice. Who
will be the principal beneficiaries from the introduction of the new technologies and
what obligations do they have to compensate the losers?
(Nuffield Council on Bioethics)
Some people view genetically modified crops as "unnatural". Other argue that it is unethical to treat nature in an industrial fashion. These concerns state that the environment is an object of ethical concern, regardless of how the environment affects the interests of humans and other animals.
Fig. 3
No comments:
Post a Comment