It is a truism that over the past decades the earth' s population has increased dramatically. There has been heated controversy between proponents of genetically modified crops and detractors of transgenic foods (or: detractors of them- save the useful paraphrase for later) about whether it is reprehensible to adopt such a method. Personally speaking, I think that it is a moot point and we should shed some light on it/ some light should be shed on it- use the passive preferably.
A sound argument in favor of genetically modified crops is that it is a significant means to tacklethe world hunger. It is evident that many people the world over suffer from malnutrition. By developing transgenic foods may lead to alleviate these problems. Furthermore, advocates of transgenic foods claim that crops are bound to give better yields resulting in low prices which will be beneficial for the consumers globally/the world over. Another point that they adduce is that genetically modified plants enable farmers to use powerful pesticides in order to protect their fields from unwanted weeds, meaning that their workload and expenses will diminish.
On the other hand, opponents of transgenic foods argue that this phenomenon may result in many thorny issues which should be taken into account. First off, some people are profoundly convinced that consuming genetically modified foods may trigger health issues. Not only is the scientific research about these plants poor, but also there are already concerns from scientists who suggest that there are more to it than meets the eye. Moreover, there are those who believe that tampering with the DNA of organisms is not in the right direction. In other words, it is maintained that such a practise goes beyond the ethical boundaries and humankind is surpassing limits beyond their nature. Another point (unnecessary: of others) is that the root of the problem is not the amount of the yields but the fact that the majority of people who starve cannot afford to buy foods. That is to say, COMMA they urge the state to find different ways to addressthe world hunger, as giving incentives to young people to cultivate land and support them financially.
By a way of conclusion, it should be reiterated that adopting genetically modified crops is a profoundly debatable issue and all aspects should be taken into consideration. It is a matter of life and death and we must be tentative in our judgements. I am totally convinced that the state should fund scientists to conduct experiments and provide scientific results. Thus, they will enable us to choosewisely the best solution wisely. (verb+object+ adverb of manner)
Vassilis, wow! That is an amazing piece of writing on a topic we hardly had any time to discuss! Also, the way you handled the issue was very clever and at no point did it confuse the reader, which is a feat in its own right.
Well done and keep up the effort!
Grammar 4/5
Vocabulary 4/5-- possibly 5/5
Rhetoric 5/5
Total score: 13/15 at the very least! Christina 👍💪😊
A sound argument in favor of genetically modified crops is that it is a significant means to tackle
On the other hand, opponents of transgenic foods argue that this phenomenon may result in many thorny issues which should be taken into account. First off, some people are profoundly convinced that consuming genetically modified foods may trigger health issues. Not only is the scientific research about these plants poor, but also there are already concerns from scientists who suggest that there are more to it than meets the eye. Moreover, there are those who believe that tampering with the DNA of organisms is not in the right direction. In other words, it is maintained that such a practise goes beyond the ethical boundaries and humankind is surpassing limits beyond their nature. Another point (unnecessary: of others) is that the root of the problem is not the amount of the yields but the fact that the majority of people who starve cannot afford to buy foods. That is to say, COMMA they urge the state to find different ways to address
By a way of conclusion, it should be reiterated that adopting genetically modified crops is a profoundly debatable issue and all aspects should be taken into consideration. It is a matter of life and death and we must be tentative in our judgements. I am totally convinced that the state should fund scientists to conduct experiments and provide scientific results. Thus, they will enable us to choose
Vassilis, wow! That is an amazing piece of writing on a topic we hardly had any time to discuss! Also, the way you handled the issue was very clever and at no point did it confuse the reader, which is a feat in its own right.
Well done and keep up the effort!
Grammar 4/5
Vocabulary 4/5-- possibly 5/5
Rhetoric 5/5
Total score: 13/15 at the very least! Christina 👍💪😊
No comments:
Post a Comment