y, the coordination, or the resources to adequately address the releases.”If the release of these organisms were regulated sufficiently, then the other risks associated with genetic engineering would lessen slightly. Chances of the unexpected happening would not be there. Things such as new diseases being created would not be so likely to happen because there would be no opportunity for it. Unfortunately, with the lack of control on genetically manipulated organisms, new diseases are very likely to result. Changing the fundamental make-upof a food could cause new diseases just as herbicides and pesticides have done in the past. What is worse is that not only could genetic engineering cause new diseases, they could also heighten old diseases because of the decreased effectiveness of antibiotics that could occur. That is possible because antibiotic resistance genes are incorporated into nearly every genetically engineered food as markers to indicate that an organism has been successfully engineered. Scientists expect these genes and their enzyme products, which inactivate antibiotics, to be present in engineered foods.Another way it could heighten old diseases is the deletion of important food elements. “Geneticengineers may intentionally remove or inactivate a substance they consider undesirable in a food. This substance may have an unknown but essential quality, such as cancer-inhibiting abilities.” (M.W.Pariza, Report 2, National Agricultural Biotechnology Council in Ithaca New York, 170) An argument used to defend genetic manipulation is to state that mankind has been altering living species accidentally and purposely, since even before recorded history began. They also state that these new techniques merely improve those efforts by farmers that planted seeds of wild plants and later selected the most productive of their domesticated plants to produce better crops next season. That argument is not entire...
