Some environmentalists oppose genetically engineered
crops because of the threats they may pose to the environment have
not yet been clearly defined. Others argue that the benefits of
genetically engineered crops could help solve the world hunger
problem. What is your position? Lisa Min
Second-year Biology "Well it depends on the demand for food, since
people are dying every day in underdeveloped countries. Don’t
tamper with the food unless you need it for the benefit of those
countries. You have to think about what the greater factor is,
whether it’s the environment or feeding children who are the
future. Maybe they can reach a balance for the amount of food they
need to make and the number of people they need to feed. We need to
find a more efficient way to provide food." Rachel
Bartlett
First-year
Business economics
"I think that the environment should come first. I don’t
believe in going in and playing with the genes of plants and
constructing something else. They don’t quite know what they
are doing, and they’re probably not prepared for the
outcomes. They need to be more careful before they continue
engineering these crops. I wouldn’t approach the hunger
problem this way. They need to be more cautious." Thomas
Murray
Third-year
Cybernetics
"I think that there are too many people in the world already.
There are really not enough resources as it is. If you genetically
engineer the food, then you can feed more people. But what happens
when that runs out? There’s always going to be a problem. The
biggest problem is the population problem. Nature should resolve
it. I’m disturbed that the population is getting to its
breaking point. We just keep spreading out. There are just too many
people." Omar Araiza
Sixth-year
Political Science
"Well these attempts seem to have had positive results in Asia,
so I think it would work for us. I’m all for whatever feeds
the population. We should go on with it. I actually did research on
this and found that there were not that many or sometimes no side
effects with this biotechnology. If there were any side effects,
they were very minimal." Juan Lozano
Graduate student
Sociology
"I think that the population should come first. This is a way to
resolve this problem; it makes a good solution. We need to find an
intermediate solution between the environment and feeding the
population ““ it’s possible to do so. I am not afraid of
this new technology; I think that they can control it and that they
can find solutions to any problems. The traditional methods of
growing crops are not working any more anyway and it’s
becoming less possible to feed the population using these methods."
Lisa Gewelke
Third-year
Neuroscience
"I think that if it’s not an immediate problem and if
there are other current sources then they should definitely try
other methods and observe the effects on the environment, therefore
ensuring safe and effective means. We do so many negative things
against the environment that we need to make a change. I know
people are dying of starvation, but there are other means by which
they can solve that problem. You have to be careful with genetics,
you don’t know what the outcomes or side effects are going to
be, so a lot more research should be done." Speaks Out compiled by
CUAUHTEMOC ORTEGA/Daily Bruin Senior Staff. Photos by BRIDGET
O’BRIEN/Daily Bruin Senior Staff. Web adaptation by ROBERT LIU.