Genetically Modified Food in the US and the UK: proponents, dissenters and media coverage

This research is a qualitative study examining the communication surrounding the issue of genetically modified food in the UK and the UK from October, 2011 through September, 2012. Material from biotechnology industry organizations, industry-funded non-profits, groups campaigning against the continued use of the technology, and mainstream media coverage of the issue in both countries during this time was examined using thematic analysis. The issue is analyzed through the lenses of Herman and Chomsky's propaganda model, agenda building and framing theory. The research finds support for agenda building as well as a modernized understanding of the propaganda model, which the researcher argues are complementary theories.

The Effect of the Farmer Assurance Provision of the Consolidated and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 on Biodiversity and Global Food Security

A rider to a US law, the Consolidated and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013, known as the Farmer Assurance Provision, encourages the large-scale genetic modification and global distribution of agricultural crops, thereby undermining the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations' determination that food security rests on biodiversity. The rider blocks the US Department of Agriculture's mandate to prohibit farmers from growing crops from biotechnological seeds where the courts have found that this farm practice may cause damage to human health and/or degrade the environment. Despite genetically modified organisms (GMOs) reducing unwanted traits in plants, the paper supports the UN's mission for biodiversity and that more long-term testing was (and is) needed for GMO products, developed from 1994 on, before a hasty piece of Congressional legislation as was made in this case.

Genetically Engineered Crops: A Study of Major Environmental Implications and U.S. Policy

The adoption of genetically modified crops is becoming evermore common in United States agriculture. However, this relatively new technology carries a negative stigma and perceived risks that have resulted commonly in public disapproval. In the United States, bioengineered crops are highly regulated. The significance of environmental benefits such as decreased chemical impact, increased soil conservation, heightened carbon sequestration, decreased energy demands, and reduced air emissions, are important enough to warrant a revision to U.S. policy. The U.S. policy structure needs to be simplified and made more efficient to better facilitate the speed with which new GE products can, and should, be developed while still providing adequate mitigation of potential environmental risks such as species invasiveness and impacts on non-target species.