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.