by Ramizah Tayiba, October 21, 2023
The United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) reported that over 795 million people are malnourished globally, 98% of whom are from developing countries. With the global population expected to rise to 9.7 billion by 2050 (UN), it will be challenging to produce enough food for the current population, let alone the expected growth in population (UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs).
It is also worth mentioning that food production has become increasingly complicated with the decrease in arable land and crop yield. The FAO found that the amount of arable land available for food production per person is expected to decrease from 0.242 hectares to 0.18 hectares. Furthermore, a 2016 study found that the current rate of increase in crop yield is 1.7% when it needs to be 2.4% to meet the demands of population growth (Oliver.)
With such damming numbers, it is clear that agriculture and food production need to develop in order to meet expected demands and make up for losses due to climate change-induced disasters and a decrease in soil fertility. Several promising technologies have been developed in order to remedy the situation but none are perhaps more controversial than genetically modified organisms.
Genetically modified foods, or genetically modified organisms (GMOs), are organisms whose genetic material is engineered in a laboratory to express a certain trait obtained and transferred from another organism. An example of this is when antifreeze protein genes found in winter flounder fish are transferred to tomato crops to increase the plant’s frost tolerance.
With such control over the outcome of crop yields, GM foods certainly have great potential. Genetically modified foods hit the market in 1994 and their ethics and safety have been fiercely debated ever since. Opinions about GMOs range from believing such technology is the cure to world hunger, malnourishment, and the impending threat of climate change to believing such technology can lead to long-term health consequences.
Interestingly, according to a Pew Research study, the debate on GMOs seems to have a wider gap between the public and scientific sentiment than any other controversial topics such as vaccines and nuclear power. Surprisingly, only 37% of the American public are of the opinion that GMOs are safe to eat compared to 88% of AAAS scientists who think GMOs are safe to eat (Pew Research Center). Such a range of opinions demonstrates the conversation surrounding this technology is distorted and misleading.
Despite the fact that genetically modified foods are not the silver bullet to all of the world’s food problems, the research and the application of this technology are incredibly important as it has the potential to aid in the very necessary fight to revolutionize farming, aid in the fight to end malnutrition, and contrary to popular belief, there is sufficient research stating it is not dangerous to humans health and harbors no long term consequences.
The biggest objections to GM foods stem from the fear of their long-term health effects. The process of genetically modifying foods can seem mystifying and even sinister to some as the technique is thought to be playing against nature and the natural order. Anti-GMO advocates have voiced their fears of potential long-term diseases for humans and animals from GMOs.
Such a lack of awareness regarding the biological techniques involved in genetic engineering breeds uncertainty and fear in this technology which is then reflected in polls. The Pew Research Center found that Americans who believe that GM crops are safe for consumption are in the minority (37%). Fears surrounding the health effects of GM foods exist in large amounts and extend beyond the United States. A 2016 survey conducted in China found that 47% of respondents viewed GM foods as a form of bioterrorism and a threat to safety. Furthermore, an overwhelming 60% of survey respondents in Poland opposed the production and distribution of genetically modified foods (Evanega et al).
It is understandable that new technology will be questioned due to concerns regarding health, however, research conducted over the past decades has confirmed that genetically modified foods pose no more health risks than their non-GM counterparts. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which subjects all foodstuffs through rigorous safety inspections, has officially stated that a genetically modified crop poses the same level of health threats as any traditionally grown crop (Rudolph).
GM crops can also be engineered to be more nutritious. One promising project developed by Swiss and German researchers, “Golden Rice,” involves transferring specific genes from corn and harmless bacteria to increase the amount of beta carotene, a key ingredient to make vitamin A in the human body, in rice crops. Such a crop would be greatly beneficial in a world where, according to the World Health Organization, a vitamin A deficiency causes a quarter to half a million cases of childhood blindness, especially in Southeast Asia and Africa. This GM product which has been made available, partly due to Biotech companies waiving the patent rights, is economically effective and efficient for mass distribution as it enhances the specific nutrients lacking in the consumer, resulting in more nutrients in less volume (Jamil). “Golden Rice” is one of several GM foods that are in development that have the potential to enhance the nutritional value of food without increasing the quantity, further demonstrating the usefulness of this technology and supporting the belief that research and investments in this field should continue.
Another advantage of genetically modifying crops in a laboratory is having the capability to engineer the crop to be repellent to certain pests eliminating the need for pesticide use. According to a study published by the National Library of Medicine, GM foods and biotechnological techniques have reduced the use of chemical pesticides by 37% (Klümper et al). Research has shown that some pesticides have negative health effects on humans with a greater effect on farmers and pesticide applicators due to greater exposure. Short-term effects of pesticides can include rashes, blisters, nausea, dizziness, and diarrhea. Long-term or chronic effects can include cancer, birth defects, neurological and development toxicity, and reproductive harm (Californians for Pesticide Reform). Additionally, the pesticide has adverse effects on the environment as its use can contaminate surrounding bodies of water, soil, and vegetation while also posing a threat to non-target wildlife and plants such as fish, birds, and insects, that are crucial for a functioning ecosystem (Aktar et al). While pesticides do repel pests from crops, it is still imperative that an alternative method of crop protection is adopted to protect consumers from the health effects of pesticides. GM foods provide such a solution as biotechnological techniques can engineer crops to repel incoming pests without the use of pesticides.
One such widespread example is the utilization of BT, or Bacillus thuringiensis. These crops include the common corn, cotton, potato, and tobacco. Such crops are engineered to carry the genes of the bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis which is found in soil and is toxic to certain harmful insects, specifically, insects from the Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, Hymenoptera, Diptera, and Nematoda order upon ingestion. The genetic modification of crops to include the BT bacteria within its DNA sequence eliminates the need for pesticide use, minimizing pesticide exposure to farmers (Abbas). Such success stories demonstrate the great potential of GM foods, which help to ameliorate fears and further strengthen the argument that such technology should be explored to the full extent.
It is also worth noting that more realistic voices from the fight to end world hunger correctly point out that global malnutrition is not necessarily caused by a lack of food, but rather not being able to afford food. Most of the world’s malnourished reside in developing countries with unstable or weak economies where being able to afford nutritious food is beyond the economic capabilities of most. Such a problem requires an economic solution not agro-technical As mentioned, the world doesn’t suffer from a lack of food. In fact, global grain production alone can provide 4.3 pounds of food per person, per day (Jamil). While this food exists, it does not mean that it is secure. The decrease in nutrient-rich soil and the constant threat of climate change have led to farming irregularities, disrupting food production in many parts of the world.
According to the UN Environment Programme, 23 hectares of arable land is lost to drought or desertification, not including the land lost to urbanization. In Georgia for example, 60% of the nation’s arable land has been rated as low or middle quality for food production, while 35% is rated as too degraded to produce food (UNEP.) In addition to losing land for agriculture, food production is also threatened by climate change. According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, climate change threatens global agricultural productivity as it causes irregular precipitation patterns, warmer temperatures, and water shortages which complicates farming (US EPA).
While it is important to acknowledge that poverty is the main cause of world hunger and not lack of food, it is equally important to acknowledge the current food supply is under threat by climate change, desertification, and urbanization, and therefore new methods of farming need to be adopted to withstand climate change induced consequences and to maximize crop yields in smaller farming areas. GM foods can be a promising tool to ameliorate some of these problems.
According to a study published by the National Library of Medicine, GM technology has increased crop yields by 22%, with most of its concentration based in developing countries (Klümper et al). Another study that lists the agricultural benefits of GM foods, states that between 1992-2012, there was an increase of more than 370 million tons of crops in the United States, one-seventh of which has been attributed to genetically modified foods. The study goes on to state that between 1996-2013, an estimated additional 138 million tons of soybeans, 274 million tons of corn, 21.7 million tons of cotton lint, and 8 million canola have been produced through biotechnology. To produce equivalent amounts of this food without the use of biotechnology would require an increase of 11% of arable land, further demonstrating the efficiency of GM foods (Zhang et al). This example demonstrates that GM technology has the potential to withstand the threat of arable land loss as it can produce larger crop yields in a smaller farming area without adding additional stress to the environment.
In addition to being engineered to produce larger crop yields, GM technology can also create drought-resistant plants. Droughts have become increasingly prevalent due to climate change which threatens current and future agricultural productivity. Genetically engineering crops to be more resistant to water shortage and drought can protect crop yields from dry seasons. Researchers have developed a method of creating drought-resistant crops that involves inserting genes from the soil bacterium Bacillus Subtillis, which activates a protein that alleviates the damaging effects of drought into crop DNA. These genetically modified crops are more tolerant to water shortages than non-GM foods which ensures their ability to grow despite potential threats of droughts (USDA).
Given the immense possibilities of genetically modified foods, it is imperative that research and application of this technology continue to overcome the challenges surrounding the food supply and world hunger. All technology has limitations. In the case of GM food, it is by far not the quick fix to all the world’s food problems and cannot alleviate the economic obstacles that exist between people and food. Despite its limitations, GM foods still remain an invaluable tool in the very necessary fight to revolutionize farming and agriculture as it results in more nutritional foods in smaller quantities. It is unfortunate that GM technology is still viewed by the public as unsafe despite the fact that the overwhelming scientific consensus not only agrees on its safety but champions its widespread use. Given the plethora of benefits that this technology provides, it is important that acceptance and development of GM become commonplace and that it is paired with other new and sustainable practices to protect the world’s current and future food stock.
Bibliography
1. Klümper, Wilhelm, and Qaim, Matin. “A Meta-Analysis of the Impacts of Genetically Modified Crops.” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 11, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111629.
2. Zhang, Chen, et al. “Genetically modified foods: A critical review of their promise and problems.” Food Science and Human Wellness, vol. 5, no. 3, 2016, pp. 116-123, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fshw.2016.04.002.
3. Aktar, Md., et al. “Impact of pesticides use in agriculture: their benefits and hazards.” Interdisciplinary Toxicology, vol. 2, no. 1, 2009, pp. 1-12, https://doi.org/10.2478/v10102-009-0001-7.
4. Abbas, Mohamed. “Genetically engineered (modified) crops (Bacillus thuringiensis crops) and the world controversy on their safety.” Egyptian Journal of Biological Pest Control, vol. 28, no. 1, 2018, pp. 1-12, https://doi.org/10.1186/s41938-018-0051-2.
5. Klümper, Wilhelm, and Qaim, Matin. “A Meta-Analysis of the Impacts of Genetically Modified Crops.” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 11, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111629.
6. Russell, A. “GMOs and their contexts: A comparison of the potential and actual performance of GM crops in a local agricultural setting.” Geoforum, vol. 39, no. 1, 2008, pp. 213-222, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.04.001.
7. Evanega, Sarah, et al. “The state of the ‘GMO’ debate – toward an increasingly favorable and less polarized media conversation on ag-biotech?” GM Crops & Food, vol. 13, no. 1, 2021, pp. 38-49, https://doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2022.2051243.
8. Jamil, Kaiser. “Biotechnology – A Solution to Hunger?” UN Chronicle, https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/biotechnology-solution-hunger. 9. Rudolph, Cameron. “Are GMOs Safe?” Michigan State University, 15 Aug. 2018, https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/are-gmos-safe.
10. “World Population Projected to Reach 9.8 Billion in 2050, and 11.2 Billion in 2100.” Department of Economic and Social Affairs, https://www.un.org/en/desa/world-population-projected-reach-98-billion-2050-and-112-b illion-2100.
11. Bent, Elizabeth. “Not All GMO Plants Are Created Equally: It’s the Trait, Not the Method, That’s Important.” Phys Org, https://phys.org/news/2015-04-gmo-equally-trait-method-important.html#:~:text=The%2 0so%2Dcalled%20%22fish%20tomato,present%20in%20the%20fish%20genome.
12. “Climate Impacts on Agriculture and Food Supply.” United States Environmental Protection Agency, https://climatechange.chicago.gov/climate-impacts/climate-impacts-agriculture-and-food supply#:~:text=Climate%20change%20can%20disrupt%20food,result%20in%20reduced %20agricultural%20productivity.
13. “Every Minute, We Lose 23 Hectares of Arable Land Worldwide to Drought and Desertification.” UN Environmental Programme, 12 Feb. 2018,
15. Oliver MJ. Why we need GMO crops in agriculture. Mo Med. 2014 Nov-Dec;111(6):492-507. PMID: 25665234; PMCID: PMC6173531. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6173531/
16. “Pesticides and Human Health.” Californians for Pesticide Reform, https://www.pesticidereform.org/pesticides-human-health/#:~:text=Examples%20of%20a cute%20health%20effects,disruption%20of%20the%20endocrine%20system.
17. “Public Opinion about Genetically Modified Foods and Trust in Scientists Connected with These Foods.” Pew Research Center, 1 Dec. 2016, https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2016/12/01/public-opinion-about-genetically-modif ied-foods-and-trust-in-scientists-connected-with-these-foods/.
18. Mcfadden, Johnathan. “Drought-Tolerant Corn in the United States: Research, Commercialization, and Related Crop Production Practices.” Economic Research Service U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 13 Mar. 2019, https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2019/march/drought-tolerant-corn-in-the-united-s tates-research-commercialization-and-related-crop-production-practices/.
SBU Brooklogue 