Biotechnological Secrets

Throughout history a common trend of technology development has taken place throughout the world. Whether it was the creation of simply fire or the wheel, humans have worked to advance technology. More recently, technology has become even more advanced with the aid of new findings in science. One particularly interesting advance has been in regards to biotechnology. Biotechnology seems in a sense to be taking on the role of God because it works to change the biology of our natural world in hopes of making improvements. This technology covers a wide scope that spans from playing with human DNA to making a watermelon seedless. While all of it seems cool, many people do not think that it is a valuable finding. Some find it manipulative to the natural world. Others opposed find it a waste of resources when the effects of biotechnology are not much more efficient than old systems that have already been put into practice. Global Health Watch 3 addresses many of the issues surrounding biotechnology. The section of the reading that addresses this topic opens to talk about what biotechnology promises and then proceeds to basically bash how it has been used. Personally, I am skeptical of the implications and uses of biotechnology in our world. While biotechnology covers a wide scope of uses, I am going to focus on its uses in genetically modified or GM foods and the problems associated with it.

So what?

The biggest problem concerning the use of biotechnology is that it comes at a high price, which while effective, is a waste of opportunity cost compared to systems previously in place. “Since the 1980s, biotech scientists and their supporters have promoted visions of the future in which disease, hunger, pollution, biodiversity loss, and industrial waste will all have been vanquished by new biotechnology products and processes” (Future, 204). This was essentially a promise by scientists, but clearly the increased use of biotechnology since the 80s has not reduced the issues mentioned. The amount of money spent on biotechnology to solve those issues has been immense though. GM foods in particular, while its main goal is to make the food supply more sustainable, have actually abused agricultural society. “The fiction of what the corporate world chooses to call 'genetically-improved' foods is only sustainable through the complicity of governments, scientists, and agro-chemical corporations in concealing ingredients from consumers and biological hazards from citizens” (Murdock, 11). This is saying that the government and the corporate world are working together to rake in monetary benefits while concealing the truth from the public about the products. The GM industry has become a major monopoly that is costing the welfare of independent farmers while deceiving the public. Not only are GMs being used virtually secretly but they are being helped by governments which is not fair to the public sector, and it continues to waste public money while knocking out the small farmers. While this does not seem like an issue that a medical anthropologist would be concerned about, it does address global health issues making it relevant. The use of GM foods affects the global food supply. It is well known that many people do not get enough food and currently the use of GM to reverse this problem is not working. As a medical anthropologist I want to look at if using biotechnology to fix the lack of food is actually efficient.  The vast majority of GM produced foods are in America, but that is not where there is shortage of food. GM may seem like a cool idea that will help a lot of producers and consumers, but from my perspective I am sure there are better ways to handle the problem at hand.

Medical Anthropological Article

I read the article, “Public Beliefs about GM Foods: More on the Makings of a Considered Sociology,” by Anne Murcott. It was written in 2001 for Medical Anthropology Quarterly and as the title indicates, it focuses on the public’s view on GM foods. The author’s purpose in writing it was to not separate the discussion of GM foods into an anti and pro category, but to instead give a thoughtful view of GM foods as a whole while indicating how the public views it. The beginning of the article states that the government and GM food companies are working together to hide their work from the public. It argues that while the public would have a problem with the use of GM, they are not educated enough on the issue to have a very strong opinion.  It is also noted that while corporations and the government are hiding their use of GM, those opposed to GM foods are not doing much to publicize the fact that GM foods have issues. Interesting enough, later on in the article, the general feeling from the public, that was aware of GM, was negative because they believed that it went against nature. The public was more concerned that GM foods are unnatural than they were about the fiscal abuse corporations in charge of GM were doing to the nation. Overall the article gave a rather negative view point of GM food. While it had a different focus than what was mentioned in the Global Health Watch, it still implied that GM foods were not the ideal way to grow food and run our food supply.

Framing the Problem

                A medical anthropologist would want to frame the controversy surrounding GM foods by looking at all of the people it has an effect on. As I said before, I believe it is a global health problem because it affects the food supply. So first, a medical anthropologist would probably look at how the use of GM foods is affecting the consumers. They would probably look into if it is a safe food choice and if it is affordable and improving their diets. Next I feel that a medical anthropologist would look at the producers of GM foods. Since there is already talk about the big corporations having shady business practice and secretly working with the government, the medical anthropologist would look into that to see what is truly going on. They also would try to get an unbiased view from the eyes of the corporations. The consumers and the producers are the main perspectives that the medical anthropologist would collect, but they would also look for any other possible parties being affected. The third party that the medical anthropologist would look at would be the old school farmer. Big corporations did not always rule the agricultural world. Seeing how the implementation of GM foods into our society have affected the rural farmer would further the perspective of the medical anthropologist. By obtaining an unbiased view of the controversy, I believe that the medical anthropologist would get a better grasp on how to work with the issue. The Global Health Watch seemed to focus mainly on the big corporations and not really address how GM foods had an impact on the consumer or the farming style that it is replacing. It did not give a framework that looked at the whole picture or really grasped what was going on. It looked through a very small lens. The medical anthropologist would do the best that they could to give an accurate depiction of the issue.

Redefining the Problem

In class, we discussed what culture truly is and how there are variations on the definition. Two of the ‘culture’ definitions stood out to me while researching GM foods. Merriam-Webster defines culture as, “the integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior that depends upon the capacity for learning and transmitting knowledge to succeeding generations.” This definition infers that culture is ever changing and being passed down for the better. One could argue that the implementation of GM foods stretches the human ability to learn and at the same time is working to be passed down. However, another definition of ‘culture’ says that is it, “the characteristic features of everyday existence (as diversions or a way of life) shared by people in a place or time.” This definition emphasizes everyday existence. In the past, our food supply did not use genetic modification and farming was a part of ‘everyday existence.’ Now GM foods rule and are considered ‘everyday existence’ since most of our food is GM. Based on the first definition, GM seems to be a valid part of culture because it is stretching learning with technology and being passed down. However, since the second definition focuses on the way of life, is this new technology actually making life any better? Culture is one of the founding anthropological concepts and should be defended. The culture of our food supply is trying to improve with technology, but it seems that the new technology, while technically becoming a new part of our culture, is not actually benefiting everyone.

Conceptual Perspective

              Looking further into GM foods, I am not certain how much my view of medical anthropological concepts changed. One thing to note though is how the further I got into my issue the farther I strayed from the medicalization aspect. It is interesting how much infrastructure has to do with an issue that affects global health. Food clearly is a global health issue since physiologically we need it to survive. By researching into more perspectives though I was about to dig deeper into other issues and factors surrounding the central issue. I was able to look into government’s role in GM foods and society in general which upon first glace would not appear to be a global health issue. It gives me a bigger picture of how things all collaborate and work together. Being a medical anthropologist does not limit ones field of interest because so many things can affect their studies.

Big Idea Revisited

                So, the problem surrounding GM foods is about if they should be implemented into our society. It is evident that GM foods are costly. While they are great for the giant corporations running them, the little old farmers are left in the dust. Using GM, money is technically saved but it loses when it puts people out of work. Also, the cost of developing the new technologies is enormous. The food supply has been defended for decades with the old agricultural system, so making new and intrusive biotechnologies is a waste. Looking through a medical anthropological perspective, more publicity of the implications of GM foods should be done. The general public is uneducated on how their food is being grown and how it is costing the lively hood of thousands of farmers. If the general public knew the full scope of the situation, they could cast their vote on the situation by choosing organically grown products in the store. Also, like the article stated, the public may not be comfortable with eating GM foods, so raising their level of awareness of their food would also make a difference in if the use of GM continues.

In the End

                Our world today is infatuated with technology. Everyone wants the newest gadget and gizmo, so it is not shocking that technology has enveloped the food supply. Biotechnology is on the rise, but it must be evaluated more thoroughly before it continues. There is the common phrase, “you are what you eat,” but uneducated people do not really have a choice. The general public needs to be more aware of what is being done to their food. Whether it is the large companies who are in charge of GM foods, or just people who want to spread awareness, something should be done to let people know more about what they are eating. Along with that, the old school farmer should not be neglected. The previous agricultural practices did work and so they should not be thrown out the window, especially at the expense of thousands of people’s wellbeing. Global Health Watch summed up the current state of biotechnology. “Decision-making is channeled towards technology-based utopian fixes that harness and commodify genetic and biomolecular science”(Future, 207). The future of our food supply may continue to use ‘utopian fixes,’ but we need to make sure that they are safe, that the public is aware, and that we are not screwing over the people who used to be in charge, the average farmer.

Stacie Larsen

"The Future Is Now: Genetic Promises and Speculative Finance." Editorial. Global Health Watch 3 n.d.: 199-208. Zed Books. Web. 9 Dec. 2012.

Murcott, Anne. "Public Beliefs about GM Foods: More on the Makings of a Considered Sociology." Editorial. Medical Anthropology Quarterly Mar.    2001: 9-19. JSTOR. Wiley on Behalf of the American Anthropological Association. Web. 9 Dec. 2012