Messenger RNA (mRNA) technology has garnered significant attention for its role in COVID-19 vaccines, but discussions have also emerged about the possibility of introducing mRNA into our food sources. However, exercising caution is paramount when considering such a step. This article delves into the potential risks and concerns associated with introducing mRNA into our food, highlighting the need for thorough scientific evaluation and responsible decision-making. Additionally, we will discuss how the introduction of mRNA into our food sources is unethical and unconstitutional and therefore cannot in faith be introduced into the United States people's food without infringing upon the Constitution. 
1. Health Consequences & Intended Health Consequences:
Introducing mRNA into our food sources raises concerns about potential unintended health consequences.
Precautionary principles demand a thorough understanding of any potential adverse effects before implementing significant changes in our food supply. The COVID vaccine is one example of mRNA having “unintended” health consequences. As of late, we have seen more and more individuals who have had the COVID-19 vaccination, and later develop heart conditions, including but not limited to myocarditis and pericarditis. If mRNA were to be introduced into our food, who is to say that the problems stemming from the COVID-19 vaccination will also not be caused by the food that harbors the same or similar mRNA code. 
2. Environmental Implications:
Introducing mRNA technology into agriculture and food production may have unforeseen environmental consequences. Manipulating crop genetics through mRNA could result in unintended effects on ecosystems, including the potential for cross-pollination with wild plant species. The potential ecological impact of introducing mRNA into our food chain requires careful consideration and extensive evaluation to prevent unintended harm to biodiversity and ecosystems.
3. Ethical and Consumer Choice Considerations:
Introducing mRNA into our food sources raises ethical concerns related to transparency, informed consent, and consumer choice. Consumers have the right to make informed decisions about the food they consume, and introducing mRNA without clear labeling or public awareness undermines this fundamental principle. Transparent labeling practices and comprehensive information are crucial to respecting individual autonomy and allowing consumers to make choices aligned with their values. Without proper markers stating that a certain food was produced with the use of mRNA, it would strip United States citizens of their right to choose what they want to put into their bodies. Not only, but mRNA, specifically introducing it into our food, would be entirely experimental, and if this experiment were to be taking place on such a large scale, without the consent of the consumer, it could very well be breaching the Geneva Convention, and therefore be considered a mass war crime. 
4. Potential for Genetic Drift and Loss of Biodiversity:
The widespread introduction of mRNA technology into food production could contribute to genetic drift, where manipulated genes could spread beyond intended targets, potentially altering natural genetic diversity. The loss of biodiversity in our food supply poses risks to resilience, adaptability, and long-term sustainability. Thorough assessments of the ecological impact and potential unintended consequences must be conducted to mitigate such risks. The loss of biodiversity caused by humans is not a new idea. Humans have caused the extinction of many plant species by lessening the biodiversity of plants, which makes them significantly more vulnerable to diseases that can wipe them out in mass. For example, the Gros Michal banana, which is now no longer produced on a wide scale level, due to it having been wiped out in mass by the Panama disease. This disease was able to take hold on all of these farms, due to the lack of biodiversity in the bananas. If mRNA were to increase a loss of biodiversity on our farms, our plants would likely be more vulnerable to diseases that could on a wide scale level wipe out all of the production of said plant. 
5. Trust and Public Perception:
Introducing mRNA into our food sources without clear scientific consensus and robust regulatory frameworks risks eroding public trust. Ensuring transparency, comprehensive risk assessments, and clear communication are crucial to maintaining public confidence in the safety and integrity of our food supply. Building a solid foundation of trust requires engaging with the public, addressing concerns, and prioritizing responsible decision-making based on thorough scientific evaluations. Again, mRNA in food is in the beginning stages of experimentation, if these mRNA vaccinations or treatments were to be given to livestock or other agriculture, without the consent or knowledge of the general public, it would be in violation of the Geneva Convention AND the constitution. This would be a war crime, as the research on mRNA is not complete, mRNA is purely experimental, and the citizens of the United States of America do not consent to experimental medical research such as but not limited to mRNA in the food supply, which includes all agriculture.


Other articles for our readers to look at: