MIT Grad Blog

Okay, this is perhaps too geeky of a spin from the classic green eggs and ham, but I thought it might get some nerdy biologists’ attention.

My intention is not to talk about Dr. Seuss in this entry but on genetically modified food. I read an interesting article the other day on New York Times about genetically modified food and its influence on the developing countries.

The article included several perspectives from well-known scholars of various fields. As young professionals with extensive and rigorous scientific training, we should be able to chime into the discussion as well.

The statistics on world hunger is quite grim (yet not hopeless!) According to UN estimate, the number of hungry people in the world will rise to over 1 billion this year. That is 1 in 6 people. Think about it. (If the lab in which I work is the world, that will mean about 3.5 people in my lab will go to bed hungry this year. I’m imagining how the conversation will go down. “Hi, Nate. you are not going to get enough to eat for the next six months. Deal with it;” or “Hi, Anusuya, your stomach is growling again.” Okay, my point is not to starve Nate or Anusuya but to stress the point that when we talk about the number of hungry people, we are talking about real people – as real as you and me and Nate and Anusuya.)

So back to my point, as rational thinkers, we need to confront the challenge to drastically increase food production in the next decade to feed the world whose population is still increasing. How do we do it?

Ms. Shiva, the founder of Navdanya, is an opponent of genetically modified foods. According to her, “The claim by the genetic engineering industry that without genetically modified food we cannot respond to climate change is simply false….The green revolution that we are building through Navdanya is based on conserving biodiversity and conserving water while increasing food production per acre. What we need is biodiversity intensification, not chemical intensification. What we need is to work with nature’s nutrient cycles and hydrological cycle, not against them. It is time to put small farmers, especially women, at the heart of this process.” Many argue against big industrious farming practices.

While shopping at farmer’s markets is indeed a pleasant experience, I personally believe that’s a rich world luxury. I don’t believe there is any chance to feed the entire world in such fashion. Besides, if we only rely on local/regional produce, instead of enjoying biodiversity, we actually will be very limited in our food choices. However, I’m again digressing. I’m not attempting to discuss operations and transportation of food. I’m talking about the need for science and technology to create high-yield food and climate-change adaptive crops. I don’t claim to be an expert in this field at all, but I’m actually really puzzled by why people are so terrified of genetically-modified foods. We have been eating fortified cereals without any problems and taking synthesized small molecules medications with an ease of mind. So why all the fuss about genetically modified foods?

Is genetically-modified food ideal? No. Just like taking supplemental vitamins in pill forms isn’t perfect either. Perhaps food scientists need to de-mystify genetically-modified food and tell people what it actually is. Secondly, I believe we have the responsibility to think pragmatically. The rate required to increase food production is way higher than natural evolution. When millions and millions of children go blind from vitamin A deficiency, is it not a good idea to enhance the natural production of vitamin A in common foods that people eat in developing countries?

I can’t help but wonder if the resistance comes from ignorance or naivety. The huge increase in hunger is real. Incremental changes in farming habits are not enough to combat the rapid increase of child malnutrition. Instead of an irrational debate based on fictitious claims, science, technology, facts and, above all, open and logical minds should enable us to truly solve the problem with world hunger. Science alone will not solve the problem, but without it we will  only be paralyzed in a world of meaningless arguments. And 1 in 6 people will go to bed hungry tonight.