Through its searches the first article takes us to Pew Charitable Trust on agricultural biotechnology. Not just one article but a far spanning research project covering all levels of biotechnology in food production, the database has found a report on the current breakthroughs in GM-foods, policy issues in legislations and most importantly talks about how the combination of plant and animal genes, a major concern in bio-technology, is not only not a serious problem but impossible in almost every situation. So far no studies that have been found address this particular issue and it is interesting to read the in depth research on the topic.

http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_detail.aspx?id=442

The next report is a slide show presented by American Museum of Natural History called Genetics: Nature vs. Nature. It is a semi-interactive overview of GM-foods, explaining some of the science behind bio-technology and its use in corn production. In doing so we learn that simply spraying crops does not solve the problem of bacteria or bug infestation, but bio-technology can ensure that crops can be organically grow without harmful chemicals or extra costs on farmers to protect their products. It however does acknowledge the dangers of GM-crops crossbreeding with every plants, creating unintended new species.

http://www.amnh.org/learn/pd/genetics/scenarios/rfl_scenario_btcorn.html

The first is an article from New York Times, published in April 2008, who notes that in the current economy, with soaring food prices and a floundering economy, previous resistance to the commercial selling of GM-food products is beginning to subside. Many companies are starting to buy genetically modified products because of the fact they are cheaper then their organic counterparts and the products are much more resistant to hard weather conditions that have devastated some nation’s crops. Resistance however exists due to the lower costs of growing and importing such gene-modified products can destroy organic producing farm infrastructures.

http://www.lexisnexis.com.libproxy.temple.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7776355000&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7776355021&cisb=22_T7776355020&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&selRCNodeID=104&nodeStateId=29126601en_US2E9A18CFF75C44F286221C9F8600BB98,1&docsInCategory=146&csi=6742&docNo=5

The second article deals with the German banning of most genetically-modified products inside their country. Again cited from the New York Times, this article deals not with the health concerns but the environmental impact such plants could have on their country. Fears are on the rise that GM-plants could out-compete their natural counterparts and threaten the environment. According to German agriculture minister, Ilse Aigner, this was not motivated by political beliefs but a desire to protect the public.

http://www.lexisnexis.com.libproxy.temple.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7776355000&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7776355021&cisb=22_T7776355020&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&selRCNodeID=104&nodeStateId=29126601en_US2E9A18CFF75C44F286221C9F8600BB98,1&docsInCategory=146&csi=6742&docNo=3

The first article is from the CSA, a digital database to help publish and spread digital articles on a myriad of topics within the UK. In this particular one, the article is unbiased, giving a much more scientific overview of the subject of genetically modified foods by explaining what exactly are GM foods, its pros and cons, why it is controversial and who is supporting it. This article brings up the interesting point of government regulation of the new food products, which in most previous articles has only been discussed, never implemented inside the United States.

http://www.csa1.co.uk/discoveryguides/gmfood/overview.php

This article is from the Guardian, a British newspaper, talks about how British citizens may have said no to GM-foods almost a decade ago and still do today, a large number of them consume meals that contain genetically modified ingredients. Most notably 2.6m tons of soy imported into the United Kingdom, two-thirds is genetically modified. Ironically a large number of this GM-food is imported from the United States, where it is cheaply grown and lacks any dedicated government control over what modifications are made to the crops.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/oct/16/too-late-to-stop-gm

The first article is by the safety of genetically modified foods by biotech-info.net, details the controversy over the issue, as African officials in Zambia refuse to give GM-food donated from America to its populous because it does not wish to use the people as guinea pigs for scientific experiments. The people however, who are starving, have disregarded any safety concerns and rioted to get at the food. Here we can see the controversy most played out during the fight for GM-foods, starving people are desperate for any relief but government officials are reluctant to take a chance.

http://www.biotech-info.net/how_safe.html

Another article from scidev.net is over the World Health Organizations citing that GM-foods could improve conditions worldwide, but only on food products that have been on the market in one form or another before, not ones that have been spliced with previously unsold genes in them. This would mean that grain crossbreed with other grains to improve yields is satisfactory but when mixed with non-grain plants to improve soil retention, decrease the need for fertilizer and even fight off insects, need further testing before they can be approved for human consumption.

http://www.scidev.net/en/news/who-says-gm-food-may-benefit-health-and-environmen.html

The first is a documentary by the Public Broadcasting Service on genetically modified foods called ‘Harvest of Fear’ that presents not an opinion for or against these alterations but instead overviews the topic, presents the concerns of critics and interviews supporters. It is definitively non-biased and a great source of untampered information on the topic.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/harvest/

After this is an article by BioScience.org, a non-commercial educational website, neither supports or wants the elimination of genetically modified foods but does cite the reasons that strict health safety tests must be preformed on this new industry and not judged according to the criteria of naturally grown products.

http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotech/pusztai.html

This article by the Western Journal of Medicine gives a non-bias source of information on GM foods but does support the publics right to know the foods they are eating have been genetically changed, through special labels and the dangers of genetically splicing two organisms can actually threaten people who are allergic to one animal who has its genes transplanted into another they are not allergic too.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1070817

This article by the Food and Drug Administration also supports similar overviews of genetically modified products, as some employers are splicing organisms together and selling the products without fully disclosing all information to the FDA before it is reviewed for safety. As there are no laws preventing such actions, only required that any ‘dangerous’ portions of the food be disclosed, this report supports greater testing of GM products.

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/DOCKETS/dockets/03n0573/03N-0573-EC2011-Attach-1.pdf

An article on genetically modified foods from Penn State University that shows research proves that most GM products are not dangerous to the public health.

http://www.rps.psu.edu/probing/modified.html

The other is an opposing article by the University of Washington on how doctors warn against the consumption of GM foods.

http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/pipermail/phnutr-l/2009-May/009707.html

My first two sources of information will be from the FDA, Food and Drug Administration (www.fda.gov) and Safe Food (www.safe-food.org), an organization that is dedicated to fighting the GM-food market.