Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

ENG3U Name: Fiona Chen

Persuasive Speech Outline


As humans purchase and consume products, one typically would not consider what is actually in their
food or how it is obtained. Most people are not educated on or do not know what are genetically
modified organism (or GMOs) are or that it is even used in everyday foods, and how it can seriously
implicated consumers health; as a result the government should promote to pass a law to label
products that use GMO.

Argument #1 What is the Issue?
(Topic sentence):
Presently, as technology advances, genetically modified organisms become more common. However,
the everyday shopper may not even notice it exists and the negative impact it may inflict on them.

Point #1(Support):
Major biotech companies pay food lobbyists, whom most are working for the government, in order to
protect their organizations from the public delving into their industry. These million dollar industries hide
what is truly behind the foods people eat and some of the methods they use may not be ideal for
human ingestion.

Proof (Evidence: Quotation, fact, etc): (include embedded reference)
Many government officials such as Michael Taylor, Tom Vilsack, and Elena Kagan, who used to work
or collaborated for major biotech companies, now provide a biased opinion in the US food ministry.
(Seattle Organic Restaurants, 2014)

So What? (Explain your point and why your ideas prove the thesis):
As a result the public is unable to obtain the proper information needed because of lobbyists preventing
the knowledge from leaking out. Companies conceal their methods of making GMO in order to make a
profit and they are not considering the safety of those who use their products afterwards. Therefore,
this causes health problems to arise in those who purchase these products. The chemicals companies
use are not ideal for humans if they are not monitored properly. Even if these problems may not be
noticeable now, it may be too late when it is discovered in the future.

Point #2 (Support):
The waste that is created by these biotech industries, as a byproduct of GMO, greatly pollutes the air
and water, and in turn, affects those who breathe and drink it in, including humans

Proof (Evidence: Quotation, fact, etc): (include embedded reference)
In 2002, the residents of Wood Country in West Virginia were informed that their air was contaminated
by DuPonts plant, [one of the most prominent biotech companies], that was producing a toxic chemical
called C8 (Seattle Organic Restaurants, 2014)

So What? (explain your point and why your ideas prove the thesis):
Innocent bystanders are harmed in the process of making genetically modified organisms. The
chemicals used in altering these products are leaked out into the air or dumped into nearby waterways.
As humans and other animals interact with these surroundings, they come in contact with the toxic
chemicals and this leads to complicated health issues. Companies are not properly disposing the waste
used to create these GMOs. Instead, it is leisurely thrown out into the environment harming not only
animals but humans as well.

Counter Argument with Supporting Evidence:
However, some may refute against this by saying that genetically modified organisms are beneficial.
Since the discovery of GMO, farmers are able to grow foods with enhanced flavours from selective
farming, and products with a longer shelf life due to resistance to disease.
(HealthReasearchFunding.org, 2013)

Research the refutes the Counter Argument (Evidence: Quotation, fact, etc):
Still, it takes just as long to grow GMO foods compared to organic foods. In addition, GMO seeds can
cost $150 more per bag compared to the conventional seeds. (The Modern Farmer, 2013)

So What? (explain your point and why your ideas prove the thesis):
Therefore, economically GMOs are not cost effective and do not benefit one money wise. Even if one is
able to obtain a wider variety of more nutritious foods, farmers are making less profit under these
biotech companies. Even if growers use the more conventional way, they are still competing with those
who are able to sell their products overseas since they last longer. In turn, this can affect the cost of
foods for the consumers because of the increase of money for the seeds and shipping. The smaller
companies are unable to compete with such large companies. Also most farmers would turn to the
more convenient way to grow crops.

Conclusion (for paragraph):
Overall, the injustice of biotech companies producing GMOs without the public truly understanding the
implications of this issue is against the basic right of all consumers. People should know what they are
intaking into their body.

Argument #2 Why should we care?
(Topic sentence):
When buying GMO products, knowingly or unawares, most would not consider the health issues that
would affect them in the near future.

Point #1(Support):
Chemicals used in the GMO products such as pesticides and herbicides may transfer into the humans
who are consuming them. This may cause severe health implications and even death.

Proof (Evidence: Quotation, fact, etc): (include embedded reference)
Cry1Ab (the protein produced in common BT corn and soy) induced microcytic hypochromic anemia in
mice and this toxin has been detected in the blood of non- pregnant women, pregnant women, and
their fetuses. (GreenMedInfo, 2013)

So What? (explain your point and why your ideas prove the thesis):
Chemicals biotech companies used may not have been screened properly and can enter the human
body after ingestion. Most of these synthetic materials are harmful to the body especially in pregnant
women, whom can transfer the toxins into the fetus. As the child is birthed, the chemicals can cause
mutations and deformities.

Point #2 (Support):
As researchers alter the genes in GMOs, some proteins in the DNA may cause allergic reactions and
increase natural allergens in humans.

Proof (Evidence: Quotation, fact, etc): (include embedded reference)
In the 1990s, and engineered soybean made people Brazil nut allergies have allergic reactions
because they didnt realize the beans genetic material included a gene from the Brazil nut.
(ABCNews, 2014)

So What? (explain your point and why your ideas prove the thesis):
As scientists infuse other positive traits of organisms into the GMOs, it can cause a negative allergic
reaction to those who are sensitive to certain allergens. Consumers come in contact with the product
unknowingly and thus this can lead to severe reactions and even death. Without the product being
properly labeled, customers who have allergies are more susceptible to having anaphylaxis.

Counter Argument with Supporting Evidence:
On the other hand, GMOs allow some nutritional benefits, as farmers may add vitamins and minerals
into their genetically modified organisms. (HealthReasearchFunding.org, 2013)

Research the refutes the Counter Argument (Evidence: Quotation, fact, etc):
However, more chronic health and environmental risks are associated with GMO, such as chronic
constipation, Crohns Disease and gastroesophageal reflux, compare to the benefits. (Seattle Organic
Restaurants, 2014)

So What? (explain your point and why your ideas prove the thesis):
Considering the positive and negative positions of the issue, the health risks overweigh the advantages.
Not only might one suffer through serious complications, this can affect the quality of life of a person
living with a condition cause by the GMO.

Conclusion (for paragraph):
Overall, consuming and coming in contact with genetically modified organisms can cause extreme
health conditions in not only those who use them, but in the children of the consumers as well.

Argument #3 What do you want done about it?
(Topic sentence):
Not much is currently known about GMOs. However, it is basic right for one to know what they are
ingesting and how it can affect them.

Point #1(Support):
One should be more aware of what they are intaking and buy foods that have the non-GMO or organic
labeling on it such as the one from the Non-GMO Project.

Proof (Evidence: Quotation, fact, etc): (include embedded reference)
The Non-GMO Project is a non-profit organization committed to preserving and building sources of
non-GMO products, educating consumers, and providing verified non-GMO choices. (Non-GMO
Project 2014)

So What? (explain your point and why your ideas prove the thesis):
By buying products that do not use genetically modified organisms, one is able to improve the health of
their family from reducing the risk of health implications caused GMOs. In addition, by not purchasing
these products, it creates an awareness for companies to stop using these methods to sell food.
Furthermore, this action supports companies that do use natural products.

Point #2 (Support):
Not only can one educate themselves on GMOs, they should inform others on this issue and support
organizations and foundations that are also for the same cause.

Proof (Evidence: Quotation, fact, etc): (include embedded reference)
Non-GMO Month 2013 was an overwhelming success with over 1,850 stores participating in
communities across the United States and Canada. With thousands of products verified as compliant
with the Non-GMO Project Standard, and the verification seal visible in stores in the US and Canada,
Non-GMO Month provides an opportunity for consumers and retailers alike to celebrate our right to
choose non-GMO (Non-GMO Project, 2014)

So What? (explain your point and why your ideas prove the thesis):
As more and more communities see the importance of non-GMO, companies are forced to stop
producing genetically modified organisms and produce more organic goods. By creating awareness
and supporting events like Non-GMO Month, this will in turn demand the government to pass a law to
enforce labeling on all products for GMO.

Counter Argument with Supporting Evidence:
Some may say that just by creating awareness cannot create change. This can be seen during the
Kony 2012 incident Critics also say raising awareness through campaigns like this isnt enough. (The
Star, 2012)

Research the refutes the Counter Argument (Evidence: Quotation, fact, etc):
Even if awareness does not create a lot of change, even a little is enough to have a large impact on
biotech companies and the government. As seen in 2008 English public antibiotic campaigns, among
English respondents, there was a small increase in recollection of campaign posters (2009 23.7%
versus 2008 19.2%) (Oxford Journals, 2010)

So What? (explain your point and why your ideas prove the thesis):
Even if the change is miniscule, awareness can improve on millions of lives. It exceeds having no one
knowing about this issue and suffering in the future.

Conclusion (for paragraph):
Therefore, one should improve on their and others lives by creating awareness and getting involved in
more organic produces.

Restated thesis:
By creating awareness, one can prevent themselves and others from serious health problems caused
by GMOs.

Restatement of Arguments and how they prove your thesis:
GMOs are greatly impacting the lives of people today health wise. Not only do they harm those who
come in contact with it, major biotech companies and the government shields the public from seeing
what is truly used to create the food people ingests. By not knowing, this can cause severe impairment
to ones wellness unless society stands up and creates awareness against this issue

Conclusion for essay - extend the significance of your topic. What are its larger implications?
As the technology advances creating more positive and easier methods in do everyday tasks, one
should see the implications caused by industrialization and constantly refer back to more natural and
organic ways.