Abstract
ABSTRACTThe expression “Genetically Modified Organisms” was coined to indicate a group of agricultural products (mostly crops and vegetables), modified through direct DNA recombination in order to obtain useful phenotypic traits or to inhibit undesirable characteristics.But the border between rDNA (“GMO”) and other biotech methods is blurred. Moreover, the ill-assorted group is frequently charged with having peculiar, negative characteristics: many activists, part of the public and a few social science scholars think that “GMOs” are all dubious, even inherently dangerous.However, theoretical justifications of this alleged problematic nature which is supposed to be necessarily linked to the “splicing” of DNA, only when applied to agricultural products, are missing: the only text which tries to go in depth on the subject, an article by biologist Barry Commoner, takes aim at the wrong target, misunderstanding the Central Dogma.“GMO” is a term that has no clear reference, let alone in a detrimental sense. The only attempt to give it epistemological dignity fails.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
