Hunger in various parts of the word has caught the eye of different people. They are concerned of where the world population is headed, given the increasing demand for food and the decreasing supply. Biotechnology has often been seen as a cure for the coming up disaster of global hunger. Clarke and Daniell (2011) state that biotechnology refers to the use of living organisms to make products or to adjust them for specified use. Genetic engineering is best example of biotechnology (Berman et al., 2013). Despite its growing goodness, there seems to be a divide in respect to its future as an important cure to the coming world hunger. On one hand, it has been revealed that the technology has not given any meaningful results. Also, it has been claimed that genetic engineering has added towards the possibility of foreseeable hunger disaster in days to come (Jacobsen et al., 2013). While this is the case, these views have been rejected. It has been claimed that with biotechnology, it follows that the production of food is guaranteed. At the same time, it has been expressed that biotechnology will ensure that people do not experience malnutrition. In the light of this, it is worthwhile to claim that, while other efforts towards preventing world hunger might prove to be effective in preventing hunger from striking the world, biotechnology will achieve the most optimal results.
According to Berman et al. (2013), the main centre of genetic engineering is developing organisms, which include plants and animals that are capable of sustaining even the baddest conditions. As such, the organisms treated using genetic engineering is often resistant to bad weather conditions, bad pests and bacteria and viruses. A good example of a plant that has been produced through this means is called the sweet corn or the BT corn. Jacobsen and colleagues (2013) claimed that scientists have genetically modified this plant species such that it can be able to produce a form of poison that kills bad insects. What this means is that farmers do not need to use insecticides to fight off the threat posed by bad pests (Clarke & Daniell, 2011). Also, in 1994, tomatoes were genetically modified. The tomato was produced such that it did not contain the substance or the chemical that usually cause rotting. Therefore, the GM tomato lasted longer without going bad (Berman et al., 2013). These two scenarios are important to the debate. For the case of the BT corn, the farmers now have a chance to plant the plant in large scale, since they are aware that the possibility of low productivity as a result of corn is low. Therefore, if this trend continues, there is no chance that the production of corn will fall short, which in turn implies a lower chance of a hunger pandemic. For the case of the GM tomatoes, where it is confirmed that a period of hunger will be experienced in the days to coming, people will go and buy more of the GM tomatoes and thus have a good reserve to push them through the entire period. Therefore, in this regard, biotechnology seems to hold the key to survival in the future.

Order Now
Use code: HELLO100 at checkout

Additionally, genetic engineering is the only biotechnology that adds up nutrition value to products. There is a set of examples that prove the ability of genetic engineering to improve a product. One of the most best is the golden rice. This is GM rice, which now contains a huge amount of vitamins A (Berman et al., 2013). The rice we eat contains a single nutrient, a starch. Therefore, with genetic engineering, it is highly possible that more nutrients could be added. This is also a very important consideration when it comes to the debate about world hunger in the future. Even where a product such as the normal rice was available, it would not be able to survive any population. The continued reliance on the rice, which only has one nutrient, would result in malnutrition. Therefore, people would die out of health diseases that come with malnutrition. However, even if people eat the GM rice only, they would be able survive without developing any health diseases (Jacobsen et al., 2013). Therefore, it is good or best to preach large-scale GM or biotechnology practice.

However, there are other people who have thought otherwise. According to them, GM is bad to biodiversity. As such, it is claimed that the spread of commercial GM product varieties has only contributed to the removal of the local food choices along with other options. This position makes huge sense. Its argument is justifiable. However, when it comes to the issue of food security, this position becomes a bad one. Seeking to look after the local varieties will not be good. The local choices have been weakened by the prevailing conditions of the world. Therefore, they too have been threatened (Berman et al., 2013). At present, the world needs a solution, and this lies in biotechnology.

Therefore, from the above discussion, it is without a doubt that biotechnology is the cure for hunger. There have been several positions advanced, that biotechnology does not show any good promise. However, as it has been revealed, the technology can be used to prevent the occurrence of such things as malnutrition and at the same time, it can be good to promote best and up yields. The technology can also be used to ensure that products stay fresh for the longer. These outcomes are required if the world population is to surviving the threatening hunger strike.

    References
  • Berman, J., et al. (2013). Can the world afford to ignore biotechnology solutions that address food insecurity?. Plant molecular biology, 83(1-2), 5-19.
  • Clarke, J. L., & Daniell, H. (2011). Plastid biotechnology for crop production: present status and future perspectives. Plant molecular biology, 76(3-5), 211-220.
  • Colloer, P. (2009). Put Aside Prejudices. New York Times. Retrieved from http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/can-biotech-food-cure-world-hunger/?_r=0
  • Foley, J. (2009). When Cheap Water and Oil Disappear. New York Times. Retrieved from http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/can-biotech-food-cure-world-hunger/?_r=0
  • Jacobsen, S. E., Sørensen, M., Pedersen, S. M., & Weiner, J. (2013). Feeding the world: genetically modified crops versus agricultural biodiversity. Agronomy for sustainable development, 33(4), 651-662.
  • Patel, R. (2009). The Third Way. New York Times. Retrieved from http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/can-biotech-food-cure-world-hunger/?_r=0
  • Pinstrup-Andersen, P. (2009). A Green Revolution Done Right. New York Times. Retrieved from http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/can-biotech-food-cure-world-hunger/?_r=0
  • Shiva, V. (2009). The Failure of Gene-Altered Crops. New York Times. Retrieved from http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/can-biotech-food-cure-world-hunger/?_r=0