Is Food Biotechnology The Solution Of World Hunger?

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) are the result of modern food biotechnology, a process of genetic engineering. Since the world is mounted by overpopulation and scarcity, science has provided a solution: agricultural biotechnology. Genetically engineered crops are the future of agriculture. According to the World Health Organization, Genetically Modified (GM) foods are from organisms whose genetic material has been altered in an unnatural way by introducing a gene from a different organism. Seeds that are genetically modified are much more costly than regular seeds. However, since it can enable the producers to use pesticides efficiently, can demand less weeding and can produce higher yields, many farmers opt to use GMO seeds because it saves time and lessens the overall cost (“What are GMOs?” n.d., p. 3).

Currently, GMOs have become a topic of serious debate in Europe and North America. Arguments aside, most people are not even aware that they have been consuming genetically engineered (GE) foods since the mid-1990s and more than 60 percent of processed foods that can be seen in U.S. Supermarket shelves contain ingredients from engineered soybeans, corn or canola (Ackerman, 2019). In the Asian context, a recent study shows that Biotechnology or Biotech crops are the “fastest adopted crop technology in recent history, reflecting farmer satisfaction of their benefits due to bigger income and a promise of more stable food sources' (Macatangay, 2018). GM crops also extend the opportunity for increasing the food and feed production in an efficient way by generating plants with higher yields and substantial advantages in reasonably short times (Devlin, 2016). In the long run, GM seeds can help farmers to produce more reliable and profitable crops. GMOs are healthier than non-GMO products when it comes to making food last longer, protecting crops from pests, and amplifying its nutrients.

Since GM crops stretch the time food stays edible, it seems that GM plants have become the main ingredient in our hungrier world. There is no faster shortcut for the world to produce plants and animals with a certain advantageous attribute (Diehl, 2018). That's why genetically modified foods are being offered as a solution into how we may be able to have fresher foods for dinner, because it increases the efficiency of farms in terms of cutting down and/or minimizing the number of fruits and vegetables that get thrown away each year due to overripe and being excessively soft. A recent study by PG Economics, a specialist provider of consultancy services on agriculture and agricultural materials, showed that from 1996 to 2014, the global production of soybeans increased by almost 175 million tons, corn by almost 355 million tons, cotton by 27 million tons and canola by 10 million tons, which all made possible by crop biotechnology (Hall, 2016).

When the first shipments of GM food products arrived from the U.S. to Europe, it was welcomed by powerful protests from environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Farmers, on the other hand, embraced GM food products. The products quickly infiltrated the markets for feed and food (Lucht, 2015). The puree, for example, is a tomato sauce with a thicker consistency. The tomatoes in the puree were made to stay firmer for longer periods of time, leading to less waste in harvesting. Also, the tomatoes held less water. This means that less water was required to grow them, and less energy was used to remove water from them in the process of turning the tomatoes into a puree. And this has made the puree cheaper for the consumer ('Genetically Modified Foods' Young People's Trust for the Environment, n.d.). The US Farmers and Ranchers Alliance (USFRA) conducted a survey about farmers’ perspectives on the use of biotech crops for their annual survey of producer-consumer perceptions. The data that was gathered from nearly 300 United States farmers age 18 and older showed that 92% have been growing GMO crops for 10 years or more. Farmers choose to plant and grow GMO crops because they help promote sustainability (Zaluckyj, 2016). Researchers from the National Institute of Plant-Genome Research in New Delhi discovered that by extinguishing two enzymes that assemble when food gets ripe, mainly A-Man and B-Hex, tomatoes can maintain firmness for over a month, compared to its average life span of 15 days (Chino, 2010).

While biotech supporters often argue that GM crops have been around since at least 1996 and that people have been consuming foods with ingredients that are genetically modified since then, the argument can be misleading. There is no data for the analysis of the long-term safety of GM foods, no independent research, and no post-marketing follow-up analysis (Gertsberg, 2010). Animals that were fed with GM crops showed mixed outcomes. A study published in the 'International Journal of Biological Sciences' in December 2009, notes that rats had a decline in liver, kidney, heart, adrenal gland and spleen health and function when they were fed with a GM corn. So far, there has been no research that has been conducted on the health and safety of people who eat GM foods (Kannall, n.d.) While we may be having fresher foods for dinner, how long can that last?

Although we cannot deny the fact that not only can genetically modify crops help farmers in sustainable and efficient agriculture, but it can also help consumers to maximize their consumption without them needing to worry about food for longer periods of time. If the method of extracting the two enzymes from tomatoes can be used in a wider scope like in other fruits and in other kinds of food, the procedure could reduce and perhaps even put an end to food waste, since fewer and fewer food could end up in landfills. Sustainable agriculture is attainable only if everyone has done their part in it including assessing both sides of the coin, because at the end of the day, in the development of the world, we all have a role to play.

In addition to prolonging the period, the food is edible, GMOs also play a role in protecting crops from pests. One of the boons of GMOs is that they reduce the need to spray harmful chemicals to the crops. For example, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) is a type of bacteria that has played a very standard part in the development of GMOs, making them a pest control that has been valuable for nearly a century (Niederhuber, 2015). GM crops that are pest-resistant have been genetically modified, so they are toxic to certain insects without causing harm to consumers if harvested.

Recently, plant geneticists Zhonglin Mou & Kevin Folta with their team of graduate students from the University of Florida, made use of a technique to test how plant genes might affect the progression in the Woodland Strawberry. Scientists discovered that traditional breeding efforts might produce GM crops that are more resistant to common crop diseases and even pests (English, 2018).

“Pests can really damage a crop. In rare cases, they can even ruin an entire field’s produce by eating the crop or killing the plant itself. To combat this, farmers have used a variety of approaches, including the use of pesticides. Pesticides have some negative consequences. They add chemicals to the field that can kill beneficial organisms, they’re costly to the farmer and they can be dangerous to certain animals as well as the workers who are applying them.” (Krupke, 2016). From an interview at Purdue University with Dr. Christian Krupke, he explained that although pesticides prevent pests from damaging the plants or crops, they have a lot of negative consequences. And these consequences are one of the reasons why scientists turned to genetic modification. This has eliminated the need for pesticide, thus making it easier for the farmers because GM crops that are pest-resistant do not harm them, and they certainly don’t harm the “good” insects like monarch butterflies or honeybees.

However, we also need to look at the issue that genetic migrations are known to occur because GM crops share the field with other plants, even weeds. What happens when the genes from an herbicide-resistant crop get into the weeds it is designed to kill? It could create unforeseen complications to crop growth in the future (Ayres, n.d.) Genetically modified crops are fertilized with chemical fertilizers that can contaminate the environment by traveling through the air. When they go back to the ground, there is a possibility that they can end up in freshwater sources. Weeds and other insects have already begun to develop resistance to some known species of Bt corn. Which means that we cannot be entirely sure that it will be an easier process in the future to get rid of pests and noxious plants (Kannall, n.d.)

Some believe that bioengineered crops will only cause mass destruction to the environment and some don't. Although it is true that agricultural processes can damage the environment one way or another, GE crops are trying to ease the negative impacts. Farmers can worry less and also spend less time applying insecticides but still be confident in the protection and better quality of the grain (Hellmich, R.L. & Hellmich K.A., 2012). And now that the extensive advantages of GM crops are known, farmers can now plant GM crops not only to maximize resistance from pests but also to maximize the benefits as well. With that being said, this process of chemical engineering should be greatly considered and at the same time critiqued while knowing that we can achieve a better life including the farmers, because biotechnology could also keep the reliance of producers to a minimum on chemical fertilizers while maintaining the benefits of 'Western' agriculture high yields with reduced labor inputs (Johnson-Green, 2000). Biotech companies like Monsanto, Aventis, Novartis, etc., believe GMOs that are resistant to insect pests, to molds and dry conditions, could revolutionize agriculture (Pingali & Traxler, 2002).

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

A lot of farmers think of GM crops as investments because now, genetic modification can amplify the nutrients of the food. It may be the most efficient way of ensuring that the world keeps pace with the growing global population. Last June 2017, the United Nations estimated that our population of 7.6 billion is expected to reach 8.6 billion by the year 2030, 9.8 billion by 2050 and 11.2 billion by 2100. It is affirmative that one of our greatest ongoing development challenges is, and will continue to be, food security (Cornish, 2018). Perhaps, with GM crops, we may be able to provide a solution to global insecurity and perhaps, even address the effects of malnutrition. Food security depends not only on the availability of food but also its nutritional quality (Farre et al., 2011). Nutritionally enhanced crops were made to address improvements in livestock and poultry. Biofortified crops can contain bioactive compounds which can reduce the risk of chronic diseases and have improved health benefits (Hefferon, 2015).

The “designer crops” in Kathleen Hefferon’s review for the International Journal of Molecular Sciences have been tested for their ability to be beneficial to the health of humans. One example is a variety of “designer oilseed” transgenic plants that have been revolutionized to synthesize omega-3 fatty acids that have dietary benefits like improving eye health, brain health, and cardiovascular health. However, since Omega-3 comes from fish oils which can add to the threat on marine life if overfishing comes into view, scientists can stick with other substitutes to source out this nutrient. A more sustainable source to consider is to get it from plants (Hefferon, 2015). Genetically modifying plants is a complementary approach. By increasing the trace element content of traditionally grown crops, the trace element nutrition of the consumers of these crops may be improved (Lönnerdal, 2003). But according to research by Brown University, recent GM foods can pose significant allergy risks to people. It states that genetic modification often mixes proteins that are foreign to the animal or plant. It may cause allergic reactions to the human body, especially if not tested correctly. In some cases, proteins from organisms that one is allergic to can be added to organisms that you were not originally allergic to. It can lead to more limited food choices instead of a wider one. (Ayres, 2018). In the context of human health, the potential risks should be discussed. There should be a very careful safety testing of plants; a long and rigorous process before they are commercially grown and consumed (Schubert, 2008).

Plant biotechnology plays a major role in combating malnutrition. But it also plays a major role in posing a threat in humans who have to sever allergenic reactions to certain proteins. With GMOs, we can nutritionally enhance crops and improve our overall health. But that advantage might come with a cost. Improving the content and bioavailability of essential nutrients has now become attainable due to recent developments in agricultural biotechnology (Hefferon, 2015). And if these genetic modification processes would continue to evolve, it could be aimed at altering the nutritional properties of certain foods that are solely aimed to reduce its allergenic potential. Or hope that they are solely aimed to reduce its allergenic potential. Because if the legalization of GM foods will be met with open arms, then it should have undergone specific experimentations regarding particular allergies. GM crops are investments for the future if it can lead to the safety and stability of our health and wellness. With all of this information, it seems safe enough to declare that GMOs can help feed our starving world that is battling the issues in malnutrition and food insecurity, but only if GMO manufacturers are careful enough.

Most of the research on GM crops suggests their theoretical usefulness, but in order to understand the underlying principles of the use of GMOs, one must be able to look in a holistic perspective.

“Messing with nature is a very bad idea. Intervening in an intelligent, tested and proven way, as we do with vaccines, medicines, controlled burns, creating natural parks, domesticating animals and creating new species of fruits and vegetables, is what is required. Critics of GMO sometimes say we should not ‘play God.’ But it is not the God part of the objection that worries me. We are not close to being smart enough or creative enough or even peaceful enough to engage that role. What we cannot have is ‘playing’ or what you call ‘messing around.’ We need to closely regulate who can use GMO, when, where, why and with what penalties if they cause harms.” (Caplan, 2015).

Arthur Caplan, Ph.D., answered a question for gmoanswers.com (GMO Answers by the Community Manager, 2015). Being at one with nature is a popular opinion. It seems that people cling to the thought that by developing the world through genetically engineering our foods, we are messing with Mother Nature. Like all new technologies, they say, GMOs pose threats and risks. And apparently, the biggest threat caused by GM foods is that they are toxic and can have harmful effects on the human body and to the environment, which is the reason why many environmentalists and cultural groups do not approve of GMOs; they consider it as an “unnatural” way of producing food (Bawa & Anilakumar, 2012). The debate whether the cultivation of GM crops entails a greater risk to the environment than the production of non-GM crops can go on and on and on. Recently, opposition that was led by environmentalist groups insisted that genetically modified crops and foods would damage the environment, claiming GMOs were especially bad for the developing world, destroying “traditional agriculture” (Lynas, 2018). And that’s the major point why food activists and critics disagree. They believe the entire system of modern agriculture needs a makeover because tweaking a gene cannot solve everything (Ostrander, 2014).

While it may be true that GMOs can’t fix every environmental problem, the benefits of GM crops outweigh the health risks. It promotes sustainability, lowers the price of food and increases the safety of farmers by using less pesticide.

“We alter our environment not to destroy it, but to make our lives better in hundreds of ways. Let's hope we continue to tamper and create a future that's far more comfortable and kinder than anything nature intended.” (Stossel, 2001).

In David Warm flash’ article for Genetic Literacy Project entitled “Tampering with nature is how humans can avoid extinction”, he makes a point about how we are so dependent on technology and yet so scared of it. Others argue that nature is not negatively being tampered with but being revolutionized. Considering the pro-GMO perspective, they stand with GMOs because they side with science. It’s clear that genetically modifying our foods is the inevitable result of plant breeding and humanity has thrived because of it and will continue to do so. Although GMOs have a lot of disadvantages present, it is a fact that they hold potential to greatly increase the nutritional value of food as well as prolong the edibility of crops, while at the same time reduce the need for harmful pesticides. GM foods are developed because of their advantage over non-GM foods like GM foods having better taste, nutrition, and quality, increased profit for growers and increased food yield to alleviate world hunger (Andrews, n.d.)

At the end of the day, it is our choice if we will consume GM foods or not. But let us not be submissive to the advancement of genetic engineering and take a look at what we can do to improve it instead.

'Biotechnology is no panacea for world hunger,' says Channapatna Prakash, a native of India and an agricultural scientist at the Center for Plant Biotechnology Research at Tuskegee University. 'but it's a vital tool in a toolbox, one that includes soil and water conservation, pest management, and other methods of sustainable agriculture, as well as new technologies.' (Ackerman, 2019)