Budny 4:00
L04
Ethics of Genetically Engineered Foods
Zach Wise (zrw5@pitt.edu)
INTRODUCTION: GENETICALLY
ENGINEERED FOODS:
The scientific process of genetically engineering foods
is one full of ethical and moral dilemmas and issues. All
types of engineers encounter different social issues which
revolve around morality and require much personal
reflection to solve. For example, I could be an engineer
hired by a food manufacturing company such as Monsanto,
which is one of the largest producers of genetically
engineered crops [1], to test the safety of their modified
crops. My job would be to take their genetically altered
crops, test their effects, perhaps by analyzing their effects
on animals, and report back to the agricultural company
with my findings. Obviously, these companies will be
hoping for results that show no negative health effects, so
that they can quickly begin to sell their products and see
large profits. Therefore, it is possible that the agricultural
company will influence me to skew my reports in their
favor.
Perhaps some of my results show no potential dangers,
while other findings demonstrate negative health effects.
The agricultural company that hired me, may offer a large
sum of money for me to simply ignore or dispose of the
results which show negative effects, and simply report the
positive findings. This way, the company can begin to see
profits much more rapidly than if they had to go back and
spend more money to change their genetic altering process
to reduce risks. The opportunity to become much more
financially secure by simply ignoring some of my research,
can very easily be tempting. In a situation such as this, it
will be very important for myself, as an engineer, to
examine my moral compass to reach an acceptable and
appropriate solution. Personally, I would not take the
financial offer from the agricultural company, as I believe I
live by a certain moral code, not only as an engineer, but as
a human being; and withholding information that could
potentially affect people’s health for my own financial
benefit would be completely unethical.
WHAT ARE GENETICALLY
MODIFIED FOODS?
Genetically modified foods are those which contain or
are derived from a genetically modified organism. A
genetically modified organism is made when a gene from a
source such as a virus, bacteria, animal or plant is inserted
into a different organism [2]. This changes the genetic
makeup of the organism and in this case is beneficial, as
genetically engineered crops have increased shelf life,
improved nutritional value and enhanced agronomics
performance and tolerance for different environmental
conditions [2]. The modified crops are often injected with
pesticides to prevent any unnecessary crop deaths.
Basically, genetic engineering results in a greater quantity
of food that lasts a longer time. Therefore, modification can
be viewed as a positive as it can lead to substantial food for
under developed countries. However, the current debate in
the U.S. over the labeling of these products causes us to
consider all of the potential downfalls of these genetically
engineered crops, and the ethical debate of withholding any
negative information about the crops.
The Debate
With a rapidly growing global population, providing
enough food to sustain such a large number of people will
continue to be a primary concern. Worldwide, genetically
engineered foods have allowed increased agricultural
productivity and consequently provided food for millions in
underdeveloped countries [3]. Currently, supermarkets
across the country are stocked with these modified foods,
yet there is no law stating that these products must be
labeled as genetically engineered. While no long term side
effects have been discovered, those in favor of the labeling
still have safety concerns, because it is a relatively new
technology, and these believe they deserve to know what is
in their food. Agricultural businesses, however, feel that the
labels would be perceived as warnings, and their profits
would unnecessarily decline [4]. This heated debate
seemingly revolves around morals, and specifically the
morality of feeding consumers products that may
potentially cause negative health effects, without making
the consumer aware of potential dangers.
ETHICS IN ENGINEERING
Engineers are led by, and held to, high ethical standards
as they continue to design and build our world. These ethical
codes are designed with the health and safety of the public
as the primary concern. Engineers are required to live with
an exceptional deal of integrity as they are given such a
large amount of responsibility [5]. By becoming an
engineer, one commits themselves to maintaining the public
safety above all else. This means putting in the necessary
time, money, and effort to ensure the safety of a product or
design before its’ release into the public. Typically, the
morality of engineers is not a hot topic in today’s society.
However, engineer ethics rapidly come to the forefront
when there is a dangerous or fatal engineering accident.
Engineering Accidents
Throughout recent history, we have experienced
multiple incidents which resulted in the revision of
engineering ethics. Two different NASA space shuttle
launches, the Challenger in 1986 and the Columbia in 2003,
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 1
10/31/2013
Zach Wise
caused public concern over the importance given to the
safety of these shuttles. The Challenger had noticeable
design flaws in its boosters, yet these concerns were
seemingly ignored as the launch proceeded as planned, and
soon later a tragic and fatal malfunction occurred. The
Columbia also had a design flaw that was noticed during its
launch, yet because the launch was successful, this flaw was
also ignored. Unfortunately, the shuttle was unable to
survive its re-entry into Earth’s atmosphere and it was
destroyed [6]. Tara Hoke, the assistant general counsel for
the American Society of Civil Engineers, reflected on these
events with great disappointment and concern. “While the
circumstances of each event have been greatly simplified
here, in both cases the tragedies may have been averted if
sound engineering judgment had prevailed. The events
surrounding the shuttle disasters encapsulate the range of
considerations that can compromise an engineer’s
commitment to safety” [6].
The engineers at these space shuttle launches faced
numerous pressures which prevented them from acting on
their concerns and averting the terrible accidents. These
pressures can include cost and scheduling concerns,
pressure from employers to make decisions based on their
best interests, and an inherent culture that rewards
consistency rather than dissonance [5]. When facing these
issues, engineers must refer to their morals and specifically
their engineering codes of ethics.
large agricultural company to disregard data about
genetically engineered crops being potentially dangerous.
Applying the Codes
Professional engineers must take these vital codes of
ethics, and apply them in their daily jobs. In the hypothetical
case of the bribing of the engineer, one must closely
examine the code of ethics to see the clear and appropriate
way to respond. The previously presented excerpt from the
Chemical Engineers Code of Ethics provides a clear
description of how the engineer must respond to the
financial offer from the agricultural company. As a
chemical engineer, he is mandated to hold paramount the
safety and well-being of the public. This means revealing
all studies which contain information about potential
dangers. As the code states, an engineer must “present
information only in an objective and truthful manner” [8].
This makes it obvious that the engineer has an inherent duty
to reject the large financial offer from the agricultural
company and publicly release the studies showing potential
dangers of genetically modified crops.
This hypothetical engineer must make the honest, but
perhaps more difficult, decision to forgo personal gain, in
favor of public safety. By becoming a professional engineer,
he has agreed to exhibit the values presented in both the
NSPE code and the code of his specific engineering field,
which in this case may be the Chemical Engineering Code
of Ethics. Both codes mandate that the engineer stay faithful
to his public duty. Withholding information about the
potential dangers of these modified crops could cause
serious public health problems in the future. In order to be
faithful and honor his job as an engineer, these codes
demonstrate that he must release his findings, which then
may lead to further testing and experimentation and
consequently the prevention of possible health dangers.
Engineering Code of Ethics
All engineers are bound by a code of ethics set forth by
the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE).
This code demonstrates the highest standard of honesty and
integrity that professional engineers are expected to exhibit.
The primary concern of the code is that engineers put the
health, safety and general welfare of the public above all
else [7]. This means that engineers must be committed to
serving the public even if this results in circumstances that
are cumbersome or personally costly. The code continues to
go into great detail about the honesty and faithfulness that
an engineer must display, as well as how the services of an
engineer must be in their specific field of expertise. Each of
these specific engineering fields also have their own codes
of ethics, which professional engineers also must abide by
and strive to achieve.
CURRENT STATE OF GENETICALLY
MODIFIED FOODS
The potential harm of genetically modified crops is
a controversy within itself. While certain animal tests show
that there are health effects, tests done by the agriculture
companies show no negative effects [9]. This creates
credibility concerns over the validity of their tests. Clearly,
agribusinesses have potentially large financial gains if they
provide testing that shows no dangers or risks, as they could
sell their products freely. This, however, would be in clear
violation of the values of integrity and honesty set forth in
the NSPE Code of Ethics. Furthermore, there are other
reports of health issues that are believed to be related to
these modified crops. For example, foodborne diseases,
such as soya allergies, have increased recently in the U.S.
and UK. There are also reports of cotton handlers in India
who developed skin allergies after handling this genetically
altered crops. In addition, studies have revealed that certain
modified corn products contain a protein which alters the
immune system [9]. The Union of Concerned Scientists
states, “GE crops do have the potential to cause a variety of
health problems and environmental impacts” [10].
Specific Field Codes
Genetic engineers of food and crops are typically
grouped under the much broader category of chemical
engineers. The American Institute of Chemical Engineers
set forth their own code of ethics which restates and
reinforces many of the core values of the NSPE code of
ethics. One aspect of the code states that the engineers must
“Formally advise their employers or clients if they perceive
that a consequence of their duties will adversely the present
of future health or safety of their colleagues of the public”
[8]. This statement is pertinent to the original scenario that
was set up, involving the engineer who is being bribed by a
2
Zach Wise
fallen short of expectations, and in some cases have caused
serious problems” [10]. They continue on to say that policy
makers must expand research funding as well as support the
labeling of modified foods [10]. I fully agree that his is the
only answer to the bevy of controversial health issues that
surround genetically engineered foods, until further
conclusive testing is done.
Unresolved Issues
While scientists are currently debating the safety of
genetically engineered foods, one thing is certain; questions
about the safety are far from resolved. Doug GurianSherman, senior scientist with the Food and Environment
Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, recently said,
“Because of the greater capacity to bring unknown
quantities into the food supply, I’m of the school that says
it has somewhat higher potential for risk” [11]. GurianShurman is concerned with data from the Center for Disease
Control and Prevention, which shows an 18% increase in
reported food allergies between 1997 and 2007 [11].
Currently, in the United States, these modified foods can be
sold without any labeling specifying that they have been
modified. With such uncertainty revolving their potential
effects, these products should, at the very minimum be
labeled as genetically modified, and perhaps even removed
from stores until further tests clarify their potential dangers.
As the NSPE Code of Ethics states, “Engineers shall avoid
the use of statements containing a material
misrepresentation of fact or omitting a material fact” [7].
The omission of a “genetically modified” label on these
products completely disregards the code of ethics. As
consumers, we should not put up with this complete lack of
concern over our future health from agribusiness companies
such as Monsanto, who are much more concerned about
their profits.
References
[1] A. Kaur, R. Kohli, P. Jaswal. (2012). “Genetically
Modified Organisms: An Indian Ethical Dilemma.” J Agric
Environ Ethics. (Print article). pp. 621-626
[2] O. V. Singh. (2010). “Regulation and Safety
Assessments of Genetically Engineered Food.” Studies in
Ethics, Law, and Technology. (Print article). Vol. 4, no 2.
pp. 1-11
[3] B. Maghari, A. Ardekani. (2011). “Genetically Modified
Foods and Social Concerns.” Avicenna Journal of Medical
Biotechnology. (Print article). Vol. 3, no 3. pp. 109-115
[4] R. Schurman, W. A. Munro. (2010). “Fighting for the
Future of Food: Activists versus Agribusiness in the
Struggle over Biotechnology.” Family and Consumer
Sciences. (Print article). Vol. 104, no 1. pp. 51-52
[5] J. Yarmus, (2010) “Ethics in Professional Engineering:
Leadership through Integrity” Leadership and Management
in Engineering. (Print article). pp. 1-3
[6] T. Hoke, (2011). “The Importance of Engineering
Ethics.” Civil Engineering. (Print article). pp. 42-43
[7] (2007). “NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers.” National
Society for Professional Engineers. (Online article).
http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html
[8] (2013). “Code of Ethics.” American Institute of
Chemical
Engineers.
(Online
article).
http://www.aiche.org/about/code-ethics
[9] S. Bansal, B. Ramaswami. (June 2010). “Labels for GM
Foods: What can They Do?” Economic and Political
Weekly. (Print article). pp. 1-10
[10] (2012). “Genetic Engineering in Agriculture.” Union
of
Concerned
Scientists.
(Online
article).
http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/our-failingfood-system/genetic-engineering/
[11] R. Dahl. (Sep. 2012). “To Label or Not to Label:
California Prepares to Vote on Genetically Engineered
Foods.” Spheres of Influence. (Print article). Vol. 120, no 9.
pp. 359-361
CONCLUSION: LABELING IS A MUST
It is safe to say that the primary concern of all engineers
is, and should be, the potential negative consequences that
their engineering processes may have on public safety. In
regards to genetically modified foods, there is too much
uncertainty surrounding their possible future health
consequences for me to comfortably say that it is ethically
correct to sell these products to the common person, without
even informing them of how the product was made. I never
want to be the guinea pig of a new product that could
potentially cause harm, and consumers have the right to
know if their food has been modified, and in what way it has
been modified. Personally, I am very conscious about my
health and always try to avoid any foods that are detrimental
to my body. I understand and respect the professionals that
have not found any long term health effects. However, there
are certain things that I feel should be taken with extra
caution; and health is one of these things.
Agricultural companies must look at engineering codes
of ethics, realize they are potentially putting the public at
risk, and change their ways. The Union of Concerned
Scientists state, “We see that the technology has potential
benefits, but we are critics of its commercial application and
regulation to date. Its applications in agriculture so far have
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my writing instructor, Dan
Mcmillan, for working with me through this assignment. I
would also like to thank Sam Sherlock for editing this
paper for me.
3