I need 2 paragraphs about which is better between organic food or gmo

Biology

1 answer:

Zielflug [23.3K]3 years ago

4 0

Answer:

Most commonly found in crops such as soybeans, corn and canola, GMOs are designed to provide a higher nutritional value to food, as well as protect crops against pests. Organic foods, on the other hand, do not contain any pesticides, fertilizers, solvents or additives.

Organic is non-GMO because the use of GMOs is prohibited in organic production. For example, organic farmers cannot plant GMO seeds, organic livestock cannot eat GMO feed, and organic food manufacturers cannot use GMO ingredients.

From a health perspective, GMO food is no different than non-GMO food. In fact, they can even be healthier. Imagine peanuts that can be genetically engineered to reduce levels of aflatoxin, and gluten-free wheat, which would give those with celiac disease a healthy and tasty bread option

GMO foods are as healthful and safe to eat as their non-GMO counterparts. Some GMO plants have actually been modified to improve their

You might be interested in

Compare and contrast catabolic and anabolic pathways

Romashka-Z-Leto [24]

Answer:

See explanation below.

Explanation:

Comparison

Catabolism and anabolism are both biochemical reactions that are part of important process of metabolism.

Anabolic and catabolic pathways 'need each other,' that is, the energy that is produced from catabolism is utilized by anabolism.

Contrast

Anabolic reactions use simple molecules to build complex molecules, whereas the role of catabolism is to break the large molecules and transform them into smaller ones.

Example of Anabolism

Photosynthesis:

The reaction between CO2 and H2O to form glucose and oxygen.

Example of Catabolism

Digestion:

Breaking down of large molecules to produce energy.

8 0

3 years ago

PLS HELP THE DUE DATE IS TOMORROW AND I CHOOSE AN URBAN CITY

inessss [21]

Answer:

1, 2, the last one

5 0

3 years ago

The Precambrian Era is the least understood part of Earth history, yet it is arguably the most important. It began with the form

zhuklara [117]

Greenland has them; the intriguing Burgess shale (Cambrian); they use isotope dating to determine the ages of the rocks; Precambrian circumstances were similar to those on other worlds where life may have emerged.

This is further explained below.

<h3>How does understanding the Precambrian era enhance our chances of finding another planet that could one-day support life?</h3>

Generally, Precambrian rocks are generally exceedingly ancient. Greenland is one such site where scientists have been researching geology and geochronology (the age of the planet) for many years.

To identify whether a rock is of Precambrian origin, its age must be determined, and for such ancient rocks, scientists have developed isotopic dating techniques, which employ the rate at which one radioactive isotope decays into another, which is commonly measured in millions of years.

In conclusion, The Precambrian period spanned a very long time, yet all living organisms were single-celled. Multicellular creatures initially evolved in all their complexity during the Cambrian period

These Precambrian single-celled organisms, on the other hand, were capable of tolerating the harshest environmental conditions of the young Earth, such as scorching heat and gases that would be poisonous to most living things on Earth today, so understanding those early Precambrian conditions may shed light on life forms that could be found on other planets with similarly harsh environments.