No, GMOs are the most promising solution to ending world hunger

There is no best solution to ending world hunger, but manufacturing food with low nutritional value and more chemicals and non-consumable foods and giving them to people in need isn't the best solution. More funding should be put into agriculture to help produce more vegetables and fruits, which are a way better alternative than the plastic food today.

We should not be putting fake stuff into our bodies. Every one who visits Europe say they eat so much and never gain any weight because they have farm to table implemented.

Although production on GMO's would help to sustain people in need, there is no way that we could prove that it would be cost-effective and/or taxed unfairly. Manufacturing food with lower nutritional values and higher chemical rates would leave consumers with less enegy intake that it would with Non-GMO foods. We should put funding into better agricultural resources with more product and less chemicals.

No I don't think so there are many other ways to ending world hunger. These processe foods are more hurting then helping.

GMO's are artificial and not natural, and contains many harmful chemicals that could rather worsen the world hunger problem by causing sickness and possible death.

I think helping people for getting jobs so they can earn money and buy food so they won't be hungry.

There is no best solution to ending world hunger, but manufacturing food with low nutritional value and more chemicals and non-consumable foods and giving them to people in need isn't the best solution. More funding should be put into agriculture to help produce more vegetables and fruits, which are a way better alternative than the plastic food today.

America is one of the most obese countries with one of the highest GMO rates. GMOs and preservatives are creating food that is horrible for the gut and overall health. GMOs are not a healthy solution to world hunger.

Producers should be required to label GMOs in their foods. I feel like people should know what they are putting into their bodies no matter what.

It's fine if people want to eat GMO food just label it in stores so peole who don't GMO food can buy non-GMOs

everyone deserved to know what’s in your food and where it comes from since it’s a juman right in my opinion

I am not advocating for the reduction of GMO food production I just would like to know what I am putting in my body when I go to the grocery store

i feel processed food is addicting stopping process foods i feel would help get people on a natural healthy diet

why change the diet that our ancestors have been eating for years and all this processed food is ought to be blamed for all the health problems that are on the rise

There are other ways to ending world hunger. GMO are not real food It is the reason we have the health concerns we do now. there are other ways of preserving food and eliminating world hunger. If the government cans sustain life in space for years in a capsule they can eliminate world hunger.

There is no best solution to ending world hunger, but manufacturing food with low nutritional value and more chemicals and non-consumable foods and giving them to people in need isn't the best solution. More funding should be put into agriculture to help produce more vegetables and fruits, which are a way better alternative than the plastic food today.

GMO are more harmful to health then they are an advantage to ending or reducing hunger. Healthier food options should be made more available and at a more affordable price.

We have no clue what is being put in GMO foods. We would be doing more harm by putting unknown substances into the food of people who are already suffering.

GMOs will only result in the gradual modification of ourselves; “You are what you eat”. Instead energy should be focused on natural agricultural innovations or teaching more people how to make their own food.

GMO Labels should exist that way people have the right to choose wether they wish to consume GMO or not.

although they are most promising the ingredients can cause harmful unlying issues that can lead to more issues

We are seeing throughout other countries that without GMOs they are living a much healthier lifestyle. So yes they will fill someone up and "End hunger" but it will lead to more problems in the end.

I feel like ending world hunger would have to require the whole country to change and with the willingness of other countries to provide funding.

Why pit thing on food to kill bugs if it’s malnutrition’s the food itself, makes it less healthy, for looks.
Everyday we get closer to getting man made food instead of earth grown food.
I for the land not the man ✊🏾

Gmo's can increase nutrient value and growing rate in food and consumable products having more value per product.

World hunger isn't a single countries issue. Choosing public health and safety should be top priority. Most natural form of development of agriculture should be the stance.

Are you really ending world hunger and increasing longevity when in the long run you're actually creating cancer?

GMOs cause unforeseeable consequences to not only our health but the health of the planet. While they might allow for better crop output the dangers of these GMOs far outweighs any positives they might have.

GMO's time and time again have gotten people sick and have been the leading result in heart disease and other major diseases that people become more susceptible to as they grow older

Then show us how those organisms are created, processed, packaged and the effects of their consumption both in the short term and long term :)

GMO's have been known to transfer the selected gene into other species. This being said what benefits one plant may harm another.

Where they are grown, GM crops occupy large surface areas and are linked to intensive monoculture systems that wipe out other crop and ecosystems. Growing only one kind of corn for human consumption will mean a reduction in flavors, traditional knowledge and food security.

How are GMOs the best solution to ending world hunger when we could just mass breed animals and keep the better genetic animals and keep using them to breed.

I disagree because instead of artificially modifying foods we should find a natural thing to combat world hunger which we could easily do .

Gmos can kill you because its never been tested and a lot of people are getting sick so technically its ending world hunger and lives.

GMOs isn't the best solution as they are low nutritional value and more chemical, while processed foods are a lot cheaper than naturally sourced and could help more people get food, they aren't as good to our health.

GMOs are not the most promising solution to ending world hunger. Moreover, it is not the responsibility of the U.S. to singlehandedly end world hunger. Instead, initiatives should be introduced to critical-aid countries to facilitate better practices within their borders.

Hunger is one of the greatest global challenges of the 21st century. Despite some improvements within the last two decades, global hunger is again on the rise, with 2016 data indicating that more than 800 million people around the world suffer from malnutrition.

The quality of food should be the higher priority.
If GMO can be proven to be healthy and advantageous, great.
If GMO prove to be bigger quantities of lesser quality, we will only increase 2nd and 3rd order health problems.

Processed food is hurting more than helping; and there are other ways to help solve the issue of world hunger.

GMO are genetically mortifying our foods which is starting to become more harmful to the environment and even to people.

Labels have no effect on the actual effectivness of GMOs in ending world hunger. It is merely a consumer protection so the consumer to make an informed choice on what product they would want to purchase.

The only thing thats gonna end world hunger is dropping the price on food and labeling the food that is GMO, Because as someone who only eats real meet I would lose my mind if someone gave me GMO food.

The majority and or all the processes and ingredients these genetically modified foods have to go through is banned across Europe and Africa. It would not end world hunger if multiple countries have already declined this ¨offer¨ from the United States.

Having GMO's or not, isn't going to make a difference when it comes to world hunger. People who are starving are not going to care what is in their food, they just care that it will fill their stomachs.

GMO's are bad for you and should not be produced because they lead to health problems down the line and natural food is better

None of us really know what is being put into the foods with the GMO's. Yes they are required to but who knows right?! How can you know for sure what people are putting into these things not to mention the sanitary value of the instruments there using to make these products... something could easily get mixed in or fall in, causing deaths of humans.

First, just because there is a label on something does not mean the government is listing what is in it. What is GMO. Genetically Modified!!! The government has resources to put people on the moon and sustain life up there for years through freeze drying pure food. There should not be world hunger with as many churches and organizations that claim to help ending world hunger, We need healthy food not altered food.

GMOs are causing girls to start having their periods in early elementary school. They're addictive carcinogens.

There have been several situations where GMOs have been beneficial, for example, Poor countries who relied on eggplants greatly benefited from GM eggplants resistant to deadly pests. and the Hawaiian papaya industry would have crashed and burned had it not been for GM papayas that were more resistant to the devastating ringspot virus.

countries with nutrient-poor foods also benefited from produce modified to have more nutrients in them like golden rice

No, they don't last as long and spoil so gives people less chance to ration food and stretch it leading to going hungry

That's false because it's fertilizer that helps produce more crops, and GMO's are more for allowing continued use of pesticides. GMO's might be useful but it depends on what is manipulated, and the long term effects are unknown.

GMOs is still not an exact science and all factors and potential side effects must be accounted for before they can be a proper solution to world hunger.

Liberals complain about everything. At least you can try and counter if the fact that they knew and made the informed decision to buy

GMO labeling doesn't have to mean fully stopping the use of genetic engineering, it simply lets consumers know what is in the food they are eating.

It doesn’t matter because estrogenic’s are used in fertilizers throughout the world
Site Dr Anthony G.J

No, they don't last as long and spoil so gives people less chance to ration food and stretch it leading to going hungry

The premise of GMOs ending world hunger is totally different than whether or not said GMOs are labeled as such.

If your stance is this, you didn't read the question.

Also, if your stance is this, wouldn't you want to KNOW that the food you are spending your money on, is "ending world hunger"? That would be a plus, right?

GMO’s contain many chemicals that alter the dna of the foods, and sometimes the pesticides used can be harmful to the soil reducing crop yields, which can lead to the value and quality of the crop to decrease and its nutritional value to decrease.

I think GMO's could cause a lot of damage to people in the future and we should not have GMO's at all since it is against mother nature and is bad even if it could end world hunger.

GMO are one of the many different things that can be good from the start causing a lot of side effects to start occurring and causing more health issues and possibly leading to another pandemic

I have not issue with using GMO's for product that could help world hunger, just label the food so we know what is going in our mouth. Really, like Wienerschnitzel is going to list all 200 items in each hot dog. Still so many ingredients are out there with little research that are coming back to haunt many people retiring. We need to see research of the end result. Not just its safe, I ate it yesterday. 20 years later, oh it gave me cancer. Don't eat it.

More funding of agriculture to grow more fruits and vegetables would be a better solution to world hunger.

No, I don't think it will help because sometimes people don't really care and will just eat anything whether it's good or not.

I wouldn't consider it the "most promising", I would say it is the EASIEST way of ending world hunger. But I believe it to be very important that we know exactly what is in our foods and where it has come from

GMO's can cause a lot of diseases, though yes they could end world hunger, why hasnt it already ended then?

MEAT IS MEAT IT SHOULD NOT HAVE A LIST OF 15 DIFFERENT INGREDIENTS BEEF IS BEEF PORK IS PORK CHICKEN IS CHICKEN LAMB IS LAMB IT SHOULD NOT HAVE A LIST OF WHAT ITS MADE OF LIKE I SAID MEAT IS MEAT ITS ONE THING

No, GMOs are not the most promising solution to end world hunger because they can cause many health risks due to the amount of chemicals and can cause the body to develop differently than it is supposed to.

They are promising because we can produce more food for people who need it. If we produce more food we can feed more people and not be limited to resources.

that has nothing to do with labeling them. we’re not trying to get rid of them altogether or something

We can still end world hunger with GMO labels. The problem with unlabeled GMO products is people don’t know exactly what is in their food.

GMO labels do not hinder progress toward ending global hunger. They simply provide more information on what you eating.

GMO's can be useful when used for good. For example, if someone is starving, it doesn't matter what they eat as long as its food.

GMOs are literally known to rewrite your DNA.Why would you eat those? They are terrible and foods should not be messed with