Biology graduate student Amber Gabb analyses the role of GMOs in the future of food security. She writes that GMOs have shown promising benefits in pest resistance and rising yields, but widespread concern—which appears to be unfounded—continues to “stifle government investment.” She calls out the recently retracted Séralini study and notes its errors in sample size and statistical analysis.
Anti-GMO groups have proposed alternatives to maintaining food security by combining “environmental and technological knowledge to local cultures” and “maintaining sustainable agricultural practices,” but in the face of impending extreme growing conditions brought about by climate change, “this might not be enough.” Alternative technologies like hybridization and marker-assisted selection may be able to produce crops without genetic modification, and are more acceptable to anti-GMO groups.
“Genetically modified organisms are not the only answer,” Gabb writes, “but considering the scale of the problem that will only be increased by future climate change, I conclude that it would be foolish to rule out GMOs so soon.”
Read the full, original story: Are GMOs Necessary to End World Hunger?