Then, if the damage is great, same low a probability can mean a risk unacceptable (apud Nodari; War, 2003). About 2% of adults and 4% 6% of the children they suffer from allergies to some type of food, but 90% of these cases are provoked by an exclusive group of foods: milk, eggs, fish, fruits of the sea, nuts, trigos, vegetables, soy, peanut. As alrgicas reactions they can have serious consequences, is necessary a deepened study. For even more details, read what Peter Asaro says on the issue. On the basis of this, the biotecnlogos, is considered capable to detect, with a security degree, any alrgeno that comes to be incorporated a food genetically modified (Milk, 2000). Get more background information with materials from Adam Roseman. Another frequent distrust is the resistance the antibiotics, that respect to the risk says of that resistance genes the antibiotics if transfer to pathological microorganisms. When if it inserts genes in an organism, the genetic engineers never know to the certainty where, accurately, they go to be incorporated, possibilities exist not to function, that is, that the intended protein is not produced by the transgnico vegetable, or reach the desired amount not to generate the desired effect.
However the scientists need a way to select the insertions more well-succeeded e, for this, include the best genes that immunity to a desired antibiotic possesss ahead, giving to origins the vegetables that will give seeds of the first generations of transgnicos. The problem and that these genes will be ingested with the transgnico food and will enter in contact with the bacteria of the intestinal treatment, for example. Already they had proven that transgnicos the inserted DNA in food can ‘ ‘ sobreviver’ ‘ for it ties six minutes, being available to be absorbed by bacteria, being able to give to origins the ancestries of resistant bacteria. ‘ ‘ Good practical the biotechnological one now tends to demand that such genes are in way ‘ ‘ desligado’ ‘ or silenciado’ ‘ in the end item (Milk, 2000). According to Cavalli (2001), an increase of toxic substances can be unchained when the gene of a plant or a microorganism will be used in a food, and is possible that the level of these toxins inadvertently increases badly causing the people, to the beneficial insects and the animals, case already evidenced with the transgnico maize ‘ ‘ Bt’ ‘ , taking Austria to forbid its plantation. According to Greenpeace (2009), does not exist studies that prove the security or that these transgnicos foods are not safe for the health human being. Benefits versus curses Benefits In the industrialized countries, have clear evidence of that the use of cultures GM (genetically Modified), results in significant benefits as the biggest income of reduced cultures, agricultural costs, improvements in the environment, and foods that benefit the consumer (ISAAA, 2008). The researcher who believes the benefits of the transgnicos speaks that before more nothing, we go to clarify that the foods genetically modified (GMs) had been developed and commercialized for presenting advantages to the producer and/or consumer, such as lesser cost of production, minor price, greater nutricional value and durability of the product. It does not have evidences of that new proteins, gifts in GMs foods, are alergnicas than traditional proteins. The job of these new technologies, allies to the high degree of security tax for the National Law of Biossegurana, will allow to the development of new medicines, vaccines and insumos, bringing better quality of life to the citizen (AXE, 2009).