The identified article is one about “The Truth about Genetically Modified Food” by David H. Freedman. The URL for the article is https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-truth-about-genetically-modified-food/ (Freedman, 2013). For the key information points realized from the website, it reveals that a considerable amount of research carried out on genetically modified organisms recommends that they are safe for consumption while they have the capacity of feeding millions of individuals globally, especially the ones who are starved. (Bawa & Anilakumar, 2013) However, it also proposes certain criticisms against GMOs that are not easy to reject, such as when pro-GMO scientists end up being unscientific as well as dismissive when denying the counterevidence (WHO, 2014). Overall, the article undertakes a careful analysis concerning the benefits and risks associate with GMOs arguing that there is a need for extended deployment as well as testing of the safety attributed to GMOs (Freedman, 2013).
On the parties responsible for the website (Scientific American) it serves as a popular science magazine in America. A large number of famous scientists and Nobel laureates have contributed their articles to the site. The website serves as the oldest magazine published on a continuous monthly basis in the U.S. Most of the contributors to the website have written concerning their prize-winning works many years before attaining the recognition of the Nobel Committee. In addition to popular individuals such as Francis Crick, Albert Einstein, Linus Pauling, and Jonas Salk, ‘Scientific American” keeps attracting well-regarded authors from diverse fields, including Industrialists, Economists, U.S. Government Officials and World Leaders. Presently, “Scientific American” serves as an award-winning source for technology innovations and scientific discoveries that have tremendous impact in the society (Scientific American, 2018). The contributors play the role of offering information concerning the advancements realized in technology and science thereby leading the source to be perceived as an authentic source of information about science, including GMOs/GEOs.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
When looking at the sponsors of the website, they cannot be said to be affiliated with any organizations that can lead them to adopt a biased approach to the information shared in the website (Freedman, 2013). Rather, the website is usually utilized by individuals who are professionals in their areas of expertise an indication that the report offered in the website is not likely to be biased in any way, but only targets looking for solutions to issues facing the society (Scientific American, 2018).
On the sources of information I have read from the article, the scientists identified comprise of Robert Goldberg (a plant molecular biologist) and David Williams (a cellular biologist) both from the University of California. The two offer differing views concerning GMOs. For Goldberg he shows a relentless need for confronting the bogus fears associated with GMOs (Freedman, 2013). He stipulates that the debate concerning whether GMOs are safe should have concluded years ago when scientists managed to offer vindicating evidence, although similar objections still prevail even today (WHO, 2014). For Williams, he stipulates that tremendous amount of naïve science has been utilized in advocating for the GMO science. While it was not possible to understand that a genome reacts to a different gene once it is thrown into it around 30 years ago, almost anyone in the field presently understands that the genome does not serve as a static environment. The inserted genes might change via distinct means while it might occur in upcoming generations, an initiative that might create room toxic organisms passing the test. Here, it is evident that the two scientists have opposing views concerning the safety of GMOs/GEOs.
From the webpage, I do not think that the writer “cherry-picked” the data and facts for the post. David H. Freedman, the writer of the website is an expert in topics relate to business, science, and technology with an experience of over 30 years. His major area of emphasis in his work is to assess the forces that lead scientists together with other experts to mislead the society. Thus, the resultant product that he offers on the website cannot be considered as biased. The writer gathered the opinion of experts in the field, including a molecular biologist and a cellular biologist from the University of California who offered professional opinions concerning the issue of GMOs/GEOs. The opinions the two gave revolved around the benefits and doubts surrounding GMOs/GEOs as well as a need for stepping up measures of testing these kinds of foods for their safety.
For the site I located, I do not think that it has any truly false, incorrect, or misleading information. Rather, it shows revolves around the opinion of experts in the fields of molecular biology and cellular biology (Freedman, 2013). The proponents offer insights concerning the need for stepping up measures of ensuring the safety of GMOs whereas the opponents argue that such initiative might derail the testing efforts while even some of the organisms bred through conventional means might not have landed in the market following the present processes of testing (Bawa & Anilakumar, 2013).
I found the website as a reliable source of information concerning the topic. The website relies on information and data that originates from experts in the technological and scientific world. They have deep understanding of their specialization areas hence provide reliable information that would contribute to increasing the users’ knowledge base. Overall, for an individual wishing to search the Web for more information concerning GMO/GEO foods so they can locate reliable information from trustworthy sources, they should focus on certain key insights. For instance, the contributors of the website should be certified professionals in their professional areas. The information should also be updated and supported by a lot of scientific evidence and expert opinions (Scientific American, 2018). This would ensure the information they access is reliable for use.
References
Bawa, A. S., & Anilakumar, K. R. (2013). Genetically modified foods: safety, risks and public concerns—A review. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 50 (6), 1035–1046.
Freedman, D. H. (2013). The truth about genetically modified food. Retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-truth-about-genetically-modified-food/
Scientific American. (2018). About Scientific American. Retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/page/about-scientific-american/
WHO. (2014). Frequently asked questions on genetically modified foods. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/foodsafety/areas_work/food-technology/faq-genetically-modified-food/en/
