GMOs are good
<
(2 of 3)
Next position >
GMOs can help address world hunger
GMOs can address world hunger by adding nutrients to food, being disease resistant, producing higher yields, growing in severe weather conditions, and being able to be transported farther to those in need.
<
(3 of 4)
Next argument >
The Argument
GMOs have modifications that can help address world hunger. First, GMOs can add important nutrients to food. One prominent example of this is Golden Rice, which is modified rice that is vitamin A enhanced.[1]
Other modifications are to increase yield and create disease resistance. There are also modifications to help crops grow faster and tolerate environmental stressors, which means that the crops can grow in non-ideal farming areas such as those that suffer droughts. All of these modifications can help people grow enough food across the world despite the climate crisis.
Modifications can also help crops stay fresh longer, which means they can be transported farther to areas in need. These factors mean that GMOs could be the answer to addressing world hunger with an ever-growing population. They could help us navigate how to grow with the challenges of climate change.
Counter arguments
This argument is predicated on the notion that world hunger is a result of a lack of food. That is incorrect. According to the World Food Programme, the world produces enough food to feed the entire global population more than 2,000 calories a day. The problem isn’t a lack of food; it is a lack of purchasing power. In areas of famine, you can actually have food being exported because the people there don’t have the purchasing power to buy the food.[2]
Proponents
Premises
[P1] GMOs can add nutrients to food.
[P2] GMOs can be grown under challenging circumstances such as drought and can be transported farther.
[P3] These traits could be used to address world hunger.
Rejecting the premises
[Rejecting P3] GMOs won't help address world hunger because it isn't caused by a lack of food, but by a lack of purchasing power.