> There is more than enough food in the world. Starvation happens because of infrastructure and economics, not insufficient yields. Norman Borlaug's green revol

> There is more than enough food in the world. Starvation happens because of infrastructure and economics, not insufficient yields. Norman Borlaug's green revolution would have happened with or without GMOs. Norman Borlaug's green revolution did happen without GMOs - it was all about breeding (e.g for shorter stems) and intensification of nutrient inputs. While food distribution is a major problem, it's simply not true that food supply is not also a problem. It is entirely unfeasible for all the food in the world to be efficiently distributed to everyone who needs food from the places it is currently grown in the time we have available before peak population. Food supply is a limiting factor. Enabling people to grow more food close to where they live will save lives. This is why we (plant geneticists) continue trying to raise yields. Try telling a starving family in (Indonesia|Tanzania|Bangladesh) that the problem isn't their pathetic rice crop yield, it's that Americans are throwing away cheeseburgers. We can feed a lot of those people with better agricultural technology. > My main criticism of GMOs isn't the genetic alterations themselves, but the way they enable excessive pesticide use, IP law abuses, and monoculture. GMOs don't enable any of those things. Monoculture is a route to efficient food production - it was around long before GMOs. We have it because it was the path of least resistance to massive scale food production. Total amount of pesticides might be increased in some cases with GMOs (though in many it is reduced), but the important thing is that current GMOs enable us to use much, much less harmful pesticides. Glyphosate is probably the safest herbicide the world has ever seen. Some of the alternatives are just terrifyingly harmful. IP law is certainly used by some seed companies, but I'd argue it's generally not abused to anywhere near the level it is by tech companies. If you read the court documents from Monsanto cases they are almost always reasonable and subsequently misrepresented by activists.