Defend or oppose GMOs: MLA argumentative essay
Argue for or against GMOs on one criterion in at least 1,850 words of MLA-formatted prose, analysing the validity of the studies on both sides and answering the strongest opposing evidence in a counterargument.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 13, 2026
One criterion, and the studies on both sides
Two constraints shape this essay before a word is written. The first is that you argue on one criterion — health, environment, hunger, or another you name — and not on GMOs in general. A thesis that tries to settle every question at once produces a survey, and a survey cannot be rigorous at 1,850 words. Naming the criterion in the thesis narrows what counts as relevant evidence and gives the counterargument something specific to answer. The second constraint is that the assignment asks for analysis of the studies themselves, not only of their findings. You are told to consider flaws in reasoning, bias, excluded perspectives or data, and poorly constructed experiments. That is source appraisal, and it applies to the studies supporting you as much as to the ones you are impeaching. Applying it only to the opposition is the failure the wording is written to catch, and it is also the one a reader spots fastest.
The counterargument is where the criterion earns its keep. Handling it well means finding the strongest evidence against your position on your chosen criterion, stating it accurately enough that someone holding it would recognise it, and then showing why it does not defeat your thesis — because of a design limitation, a scope the study does not cover, or a stronger body of evidence pointing the other way. A counterargument that answers a weak version of the opposing case reads as evasion. The formatting requirements carry real weight too: the 1,850-word minimum caps the grade at sixty percent if missed by a single word, and the note about online word processors counting differently is a warning, not an aside. Check the count in the format you submit, and against the draft you upload, not the one on screen. The header block, margins, page numbering, title and spacing are listed as requirements, and they are quick marks to lose for nothing.
Likely learning objectives
Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.
- 01Narrow a broad controversy to a single arguable criterion and state it in a thesis.
- 02Appraise study quality by design, bias, scope and excluded data rather than by conclusion.
- 03Construct a counterargument that states the opposing case at its strongest.
- 04Integrate cited evidence into an argument without letting sources do the arguing.
- 05Apply MLA in-text citation and Works Cited conventions consistently.
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question
You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes. Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages. Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor. The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 01A thesis defending or opposing GMOs on one named criterion.
- 02Analysis of the scientific support for the position and the evidence against it.
- 03An appraisal of the validity of studies used on both sides.
- 04A counterargument answering the strongest opposing evidence.
- 05At least 1,850 words, double-spaced, with a correct MLA Works Cited page and in-text citations.
Thesis, evidence, appraisal, counterargument
Thesis on a single criterion
Name the criterion and the position, so the reader knows what evidence will count.
The scientific support for the position
The strongest evidence for the thesis, presented with its study designs.
Appraising your own sources
Limitations of the supporting studies stated openly before the opposition raises them.
The strongest opposing evidence
The best case against the thesis on the same criterion, stated fairly.
Counterargument and rebuttal
Why the opposing evidence does not defeat the thesis, on grounds of design, scope or weight.
Conclusion
What follows for the named criterion if the thesis holds.
Bodies that reviewed the evidence, not advocacy sites
Recommended databases
- World Health Organization
- National Academies Press
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration
- USDA Economic Research Service
- Food and Agriculture Organization
- Purdue OWL
Search sequence
- 1.Read the National Academies review of genetically engineered crops and note what it concludes and what it declines to conclude.
- 2.Read the WHO question-and-answer material on GM foods for the health criterion specifically.
- 3.Check FDA and USDA material for the regulatory and adoption picture in the United States.
- 4.For each study you plan to cite, record its design, sample, funding and stated limitations.
- 5.Confirm MLA in-text and Works Cited formatting against Purdue OWL before submitting.
Reference shortlist
These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.
Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.
- 01
Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects
National Academies Press · 2016
A consensus review weighing the evidence on health, environment and agronomic outcomes, and a model of how study quality is appraised.
- 02
Food, genetically modified
World Health Organization · 2024
The health criterion stated by an international body, useful for either position.
- 03
GMO Crops, Animal Food, and Beyond
U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2024
The regulatory framework and safety assessment process, which is often assumed rather than described.
- 04
Biotechnology
USDA Economic Research Service · 2024
Adoption and economic data for the hunger and agronomic criteria.
- 05
Food Safety and Quality
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations · 2024
International food safety standards, relevant where the criterion is global hunger or trade.
- 06
MLA Citations: Overview
Purdue OWL, Purdue University · 2024
The citation format the assignment requires for both in-text references and the Works Cited page.
Review before submission
Common mistakes
- Arguing GMOs in general instead of on one criterion, which makes the evidence unmanageable.
- Appraising only the opposition's studies while accepting supporting studies uncritically.
- Answering a weak version of the opposing case in the counterargument.
- Summarising sources one after another instead of building an argument through them.
- Missing the 1,850-word minimum, which caps the grade at sixty percent.
- Citing advocacy material as though it carried the weight of a systematic review.
Submission checklist
- The thesis names one criterion and takes a clear position on it.
- Studies supporting the position are appraised, not just cited.
- The counterargument states the opposing evidence at its strongest before answering it.
- Word count is at least 1,850 in the submitted format.
- MLA in-text citations appear for all referenced material and match the Works Cited page.
- The header, margins, title and spacing follow the stated requirements.
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.
Written by
Aaron Bishop
MA, Education
assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines
Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.
Reviewed by
Dr. Nathan Cole
PhD, Rhetoric & Composition
Argumentation and thesis development
Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.