Writer: 70 percent increase in global food need is reason to embrace genetically modified crops

The Atlantic's Isobel Coleman takes on genetically modified crops and their potential to feed the world in the magazine's online international section. Accused of being too one-sided on the issue, the writer tries to balance "the reality that by 2050, the world will likely have another 2 billion mouths to feed and face an estimated 70 percent increase in global food demand" with the risks that many were throwing her way. (Reuters photo: Zimbabwean subsistence farmer)

Noting that no study has yet to show any harmful health effect from eating genetically altered food, Coleman begins with its costs, which are high. There's hardship in implementation, especially in developing countries; the method's expanded use of pesticides, as it tries to avoid the mistakes of industrialized, non-green agriculture that ultimately can destroy land long-term.

Making use of a proposal from the Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change, Coleman writes that the solution is complicated and multi-faceted. Yet, with Western consumers throwing away one-third of the food they buy, and much food left to rot because it cannot get to consumers who need it, the questions remain about what is to be done. Coleman concludes she'd opt for the genetically manipulated: "I would take the unproven fears of Frankenstein over the inevitability of the Grim Reaper that promises the near certainty of continuing poverty and food crises in poor countries."