Cultural Backlash
Perhaps one of the most visible
negative ramifications of the use of genetically
modified crops has been the cultural backlash.
Farmers are drawing the ire of environmentalists,
concerned public, and scientists who are vehemently
opposed to the use of this technology in some or all
settings. The reasons for their complaints vary in
scope. Environmentalists claim that we are
destroying the natural order of the world ecosystem and
that we are reducing natural diversity by altering the
genetic material of a crop plant (Gott, 2002).
Some more spiritual environmentalists claim that we are
"playing God" by using genetic modification, a very
common sentiment. More informed scientists object
on the basis of unknown risk or horizontal gene transfer
(Gott, 2002). That is, would it be possible for
these genes that we insert into our crop plants to
escape and create some sort of weed that is then also
imbued with quite favorable characteristics (Clupper,
2003). The most horrific of scenarios could be
painted using this fear, a gene perhaps escaping to give
weeds herbicide resistance and thereby allowing them to
choke out all vestiges of a crop (Clupper, 2003).
Whether or not these complaints are valid, the protests of these individuals have
been enough of a deterrent to genetic modification in
the United States that some farmers have completely
rejected any future plantings of pesticide resistant
crops in the southwest (Lehrman,
1999). Genetic modification is not only giving
farmers a bad name and causing them to be even more
unappreciated, but it is also wearing on their wallets (Lehrman,
1999). The latter fact is quite ironic considering
that financial burden is one of the main things that genetic modification
is trying to alleviate (Lehrman, 1999). If genetic
modification saves them money only to lose that money again
in the future, then what good is the new technology (Lehrman,
1999)?
A protestor of GMOs sign refers
to Monsanto, a biotechnology company. (Grove,
2003)