Posted: August 6th, 2022

6-4 Project Part One: Planning Document Submission

GMO’S

SCI 200 Project Part One: Second Draft

Jennifer Moore

Applied Natural Science

SCI-200

Professor James Rogers

July 31, 2022

SCI 200 Project Part One: Second Draft

Introduction

I want to investigate whether GMOs have negative health implications on the consumers. It is important to understand the downside of consuming GMO products as far as health is concerned vis-à-vis the perceived advantages of these products. The results of the investigation will provide the basis as to whether more research is required to develop these products and make them safe for use, or whether they should be done away with completely. Most of the food stuffs in the market currently are genetically modified. Genetic modification has enhanced the productivity, as well as the ability for these products to survive harsh environmental conditions. GM foods also have a longer shelf-life. Consequently, they have enhanced food sufficiency and curbed malnutrition. However, the world is facing an unprecedented crisis characterized by a surge in lifestyle diseases. Could these diseases be as a result of the rise in consumption of GMOs?

I will use three scientific resources to investigate the issue. According to the article “No Scientific Consensus on GMO Safety” by Hilbeck et al., 2015, research on the health implications of GMO products has been hampered by so many factors. Due to insufficient research occasioned by funding constraints, some inconclusive recommendations have been made purporting that GMOs are safe for consumption; an idea heavily contested in the article. The second resource “Genetically engineered crops: experience and prospects” by Bian posits that, there is no sufficient evidence to link GMOs to lifestyle diseases. This is because it is difficult to model diseases occurrence from the consumption of a certain food. Moreover, conducting experiments on metabolites of GM plants is such a daunting task, and no conclusive evidence can be gathered. However, it is safe to say that GM plants have decreased diseases due to limiting the use of herbicides which pose dangers to human beings. The third resource “Genetically modified foods: A critical review of their promise and problems” by Zhang et al. This resource imbues that GMO foods result in health problems such as genetic hazards, allergies, and poisoning. However, it also acknowledges the fact that it is difficult to confirm some concerns as there is insufficient research on the safety of GMOs. Therefore, all the three resources acknowledge that research on the safety of GMO products is inconclusive and no assumptions should be made, hence the need to observe precautionary principles. These resources are significant in the investigation as they highlight the strides that have been made in refuting or affirming the safety of GMO products, and the challenges to this effect. I followed a 5-step process when searching for these sources: 1) Identify an issue in the natural science to investigate, 2) develop a question that the research will address, 3) determine what kind of resources are suitable for the issue, 4) choose the resources, and 5) analyze the resources and compile a reference list. I examined different factors when making choices. This includes reliability of the information, subject matter, credibility of information, bias or objectivity, and currency.

Based on my review, I would like to know whether GMO foods have any negative health implications on the consumers.

Audience

Physicians would be most interested on my issue as they handle patients who present different problems in hospital facilities each day. As such, the physicians can observe the different symptoms presented by the patients, as well as check the medical history of their patients, and ask some life style questions so as to piece together the impact of GMOs on human health. Studies indicate that poor product labelling and the lack of sufficient funding has hampered researchers from analyzing the health implications of GMO consumption. Therefore, using this approach where physicians conduct research from the patient log, we are able to save on cost as well acquire more reliable information on the safety of GMOs.

Message

To effectively tailor my message to the physicians, I would highlight a background of the problem of study, the challenges of conducting credible scientific, and the importance of involving physicians in this study. Since physicians interact with all manner of patients, and since they are learned people who rely on science in the delivery of their services, it will be very easy for them to understand scientific terminologies. To communicate with them more effectively, I will use relevant statistics, and scientific terminologies to package my message.

Principle

Gene manipulation is the main reason why GMOs are dangerous to human health. Manipulating of genes results in an interruption in the normal functioning of cells. Consequently, in order for the system to cope with the foreign gene, some mutations and readjustments take place. The consequences of gene expression are the potential development or aggravation of lifestyle diseases such as allergy, such as was experienced with star link maize (Zhang et al., 2016). Therefore, to identify and document similar connections of GMOs to ill-health, more research has to be conducted on various products and how they interrupt normal body functioning (Bian, 2021). This could be possible and more convenient if done from all health facilities by physicians.

Conclusion

GMOs promote lifestyle diseases by altering the genetic constitution of organisms. To ensure credible and well researched evidence to support the hypothesis, more research has to be conducted on the response of the human body and plant to genetic modification. The variabilities that result due to endogenic modifications and the resistance that is developed to bacteria and other drugs should be modelled and extrapolated to reflect the potential health implications on the human genetic composition (Zhang et al., 2016). To clear the anxiety and baseless assumptions harbored by the public, it is vital that conclusive research is conducted and published for public use.

References

Bian, D. D. Y. X. K. J. G. G. Z. M. Q. I. F. A. Y. I. (2021). Genetically engineered crops: experience and prospects(Chinese Edition). Science Press.

Hilbeck, A., Binimelis, R., Defarge, N., Steinbrecher, R., Székács, A., Wickson, F., Antoniou, M., Bereano, P. L., Clark, E. A., Hansen, M., Novotny, E., Heinemann, J., Meyer, H., Shiva, V., & Wynne, B. (2015). No scientific consensus on GMO safety. Environmental Sciences Europe, 27(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-014-0034-1

Zhang, C., Wohlhueter, R., & Zhang, H. (2016). Genetically modified foods: A critical review of their promise and problems. Food Science and Human Wellness, 5(3), 116–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fshw.2016.04.002

SCI 200 Project Part One Guidelines and Rubric

Overview
Basic scientific literacy is essential for understanding real-world applications of the natural sciences. As a consumer and voter, you will be faced with issues that
require a basic understanding of science. For example, you might ask yourself the following questions: How can genetically modified foods affect my health?
Should scientists be held liable for not predicting earthquakes that led to human casualties, as they were in Italy in 2012? Is anthropogenic climate change real?
Is fracking a concern where I live? Because of the prevalence of natural science issues such as these, it is important to understand basic natural science concepts
and how they impact our daily lives.

The project for this course has two parts. In Part One, you will conduct a research investigation that examines an issue in the natural sciences. You will identify
appropriate resources for investigating the issue you select, use these resources to develop a question related to the issue, and apply natural science principles
to the issue and question. In addition, you will identify an audience who would be interested in the selected issue. In Part Two, you will develop a presentation
for the audience you identified in Part One. In your presentation, you will explain how scientific thinking has impacted you and your audience, supporting your
claims with evidence.

Part One of this project addresses the following course outcomes:

 Illustrate the impact of scientific thinking on personal and professional experiences
 Select appropriate and relevant science resources in investigating contemporary issues in the natural sciences
 Communicate effectively to specific audiences in examining fundamental aspects of the natural world
 Apply essential principles of the natural sciences in addressing critical questions related to the natural world

Prompt
Select a contemporary issue in the natural sciences to investigate. You may select an issue that was discussed in the course, or you may select your own, with
instructor approval. You could consider using your topic and question from Perspectives in the Natural Sciences if they are something you would like to
investigate further for this project. After selecting an issue, you will conduct a research investigation, identifying appropriate resources for researching the issue,
developing a question related to the issue, and applying principles of natural science to your issue and question. You will submit your planning document as a
written report.

1

Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:

I. Introduction: In this section, you will discuss your natural science issue and select resources that you can use to research the issue. This will lead you to
the development of a research question related to your issue. Specifically, you should:

a. Describe the issue in the natural sciences that you have selected to investigate. Why is this issue significant?
b. Describe at least three science resources that you could use to investigate the issue you selected. Your sources must be relevant to your issue

and must be of an academic nature appropriate for the issue. In your description, consider questions such as: What are the similarities and
differences in the content of your sources? What makes them appropriate and relevant for investigating your issue? What was your thought
process when you were searching for sources? How did you make choices?

c. Based on your review of science resources, develop a specific question related to the issue you selected. In other words, what would you like to
know more about?

II. Body: In this section, you will use the natural science resources that you selected to investigate your question, focusing on an appropriate audience and
the scientific principles related to the issue. Make sure to cite your sources. Based on your research:

a. Identify an audience that would be interested in your issue and the question you developed. For example, who would benefit most from hearing
your message, or who could best help in addressing the issue?

b. Describe how and why you can tailor your message to your audience, providing specific examples. For example, will your audience understand
scientific terminology and principles, or will you need to explain them? How will you communicate effectively with your audience?

c. Identify the natural science principle(s) that apply to your question and issue. For example, if your issue is global climate change, the principle
you might identify is that the sun is the primary source of energy for Earth’s climate system.

d. Explain how the principle(s) you identified apply to your issue and question. In other words, how are the natural science principle(s) you
identified relevant to your question and issue?

III. Conclusion: In this section, you will conclude your research investigation by discussing future directions for the debate on your issue. Specifically, you
should:

a. Formulate a hypothesis that addresses the question you developed. Make sure your hypothesis is based on your investigation of your question.
b. Explain how a natural scientist would go about collecting evidence to support or refute the hypothesis you formulated. In other words, what

would the next steps be if a natural scientist were to continue researching your hypothesis? Make sure to support your response with the
natural science resources that you selected.

IV. Provide a reference list that includes all of the science resources you used to investigate your issue and question. Ensure that your list is formatted
according to current APA guidelines (or another format, with instructor permission).

2

Project Part One Rubric
Guidelines for Submission: Your planning document should be 3–5 pages, double spaced, with 12-point Times New Roman font and one-inch margins. You
should use current APA guidelines (or another format approved by your instructor) for your citations and reference list.

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (85%) Needs Improvement (55%) Not Evident (0%) Value
Introduction: Issue Meets “Proficient” criteria, and

description is exceptionally
clear and contextualized

Describes selected issue in
natural sciences and its
significance

Describes selected issue in
natural sciences and its
significance but with gaps in
detail or clarity

Does not describe selected issue
in natural sciences and its
significance

9.

5

Introduction: Science
Resources

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and
description of resources
demonstrates strong
understanding of information
needed to investigate issues in
the natural sciences

Describes at least three
relevant and appropriate
science resources that could be
used to investigate selected
issue

Describes at least three science
resources that could be used to
investigate selected issue but
with gaps in appropriateness,
relevance, or detail

Does not describe at least three
science resources that could be
used to investigate selected issue

9.5

Introduction: Specific
Question

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and
response demonstrates insight
into connection between
research and question

Develops specific question
related to selected issue and
based on review of science
resources

Develops specific question
related to selected issue, but
question is not based on review
of science resources

Does not develop specific
question related to selected issue

9.5

Body: Audience Meets “Proficient” criteria, and
identification of audience
demonstrates insight into issue
and question

Identifies an audience that
would be interested in issue
and question, citing source(s)

Identifies an audience, but
audience is not appropriate for
issue and question, or there are
gaps in citation

Does not identify an audience 9.5

Body: Message Meets “Proficient” criteria, and
response demonstrates
sophisticated understanding of
how to effectively
communicate with specific
audience

Describes how and why
message can be tailored to
audience, providing specific
examples and citing source(s)

Describes how and why
message can be tailored to
audience but with gaps in
examples or citation

Does not describe how and why
message can be tailored to
audience

9.5

Body: Identify
Principle(s)

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and
response demonstrates insight
into essential natural science
principles

Identifies natural science
principle(s) that apply to issue
and question, citing source(s)

Identifies natural science
principle(s) that apply to issue
and question but with gaps in
accuracy or citation

Does not identify natural science
principle(s) that apply to issue
and question

9.5

Body: Explain
Principle(s)

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and
response demonstrates insight
into essential natural science
principles

Explains how identified
principle(s) apply to issue and
question, citing source(s)

Explains how identified
principle(s) apply to issue and
question but with gaps in
detail, clarity, or citations

Does not explain how identified
principle(s) apply to issue and
question

9.5

3

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (85%) Needs Improvement (55%) Not Evident (0%) Value
Conclusion:
Hypothesis

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and
response demonstrates
understanding of scientific
thinking

Formulates hypothesis that
addresses question and is
based on investigation of
question

Formulates hypothesis that
addresses question, but
hypothesis is not based on
investigation of question

Does not formulate hypothesis
that addresses question

9.5

Conclusion: Natural
Scientist

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and
response demonstrates
understanding of scientific
thinking

Explains how a natural scientist
would go about collecting
evidence to support or refute
hypothesis

Explains how a natural scientist
would go about collecting
evidence to support or refute
hypothesis, but explanation has
gaps in clarity, detail, or logic

Does not explain how a natural
scientist would go about
collecting evidence to support or
refute hypothesis

9.5

Reference List Provides reference list that
includes all science resources
used to investigate issue and
question, and list is formatted
according to current APA
guidelines (100%)

Provides reference list that
includes all science resources
used to investigate issue and
question, but list has gaps in
adherence to current APA
formatting guidelines

Does not provide reference list
that includes all science resources
used to investigate issue and
question

9.5

Articulation of
Response

Submission is free of errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, and
organization and is presented
in a professional and easy-to-
read format

Submission has no major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization

Submission has major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
that negatively impact
readability and articulation of
main ideas

Submission has critical errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
that prevent understanding of
ideas

5

Total 100%

4

SCI 200 Project Part One Guidelines and Rubric
Overview
Prompt
Project Part One Rubric