So, the question has now come up with several of my fellow Vegan friends. Is a Genetically Modified Tomato really Vegan if it has a gene that originated with a Pig?
Most hardcore Vegans would say NO. However, I beg to differ and here's why:
Plants and Animals are all made up of thousands of genes. The figure is between 30,000 and 40,000 for Humans and only slightly less for animals. The number is about the same when it comes to plants. I believe that when ONE specific gene is used to make a crop of Rice more productive by utilizing intrinsic values from an Animal Gene, that does NOT inherently mean the crop is non-vegan. It does NOT mean that crop is part animal. However, most Vegans would disagree.
For me, the Compassionate response is to use as much of our knowledge of plants to make sure that the world has more access to food. The guy that changed Rice crops using a gene from a Pig won a Nobel Prize for his efforts and they say he fed an addiotional 1 Billion People. Sounds pretty Compassionate to me. To deny poor people this type of food is uncompassionate, so for me, Vegans need to think about them instead of themselves when dealing with GMOs. At this point in Human History, almost everything we do or touch has been modified in some way, shape, or form anyways, so we should use it for good.
Also, Vegans usually think that animals are actually harmed in the process of obtaining their DNA. Whereas this MAY have been true many years ago, the entire process is contained in a laboratory and is produced without harming any animal. Therefore, I feel as though the only Compassionate response would be to use as many GMOs as possible to try and feed the world.
Maybe that makes me "Not Vegan", but if being Vegan means that I believe that one single gene being spliced into a crop of tomatoes makes it un-eatable, then I am NOT a Vegan. I am a "non-dairy vegetarian" I guess.
I would be interested for anyone's thoughts here....
No comments:
Post a Comment