Genetically Modified Organisms are unsafe for people and the environment.

I'd like to say thanks to anyone who is reading this because it means you are taking a lot of time out of your day to come and read all of this. If anything, I'd say reading the conclusion of this debate is most important, so please do not vote until you have read the debate entirely. This whole debate boils down to two things: It comes down to whether or not GMOs are really necessary. It also comes down to whether or not GMOs are more beneficial than harmful. Below is a map of the world showing the percentages of populations that are undernourished. Parts of South America, Asia and largely Africa are the most undernourished places in the world. . http://www.restlessbeings.org...; />Image from: . http://www.restlessbeings.org... Let's take a look at Africa for example. Africa's population has more than tripled since 1960, yet the amount of food production in Africa has gone down 10% [21. . http://www.guardian.co.uk...]. As a result, many people are not getting the food they need and many of them aren't getting enough nutrients. One solution is to let nature take over and to let people starve and die. But is that really the best solution we have to offer? In my opponent's closing arguments, she says that people go hungry because they cannot afford the food even though the world has enough food to support every single person on Earth. But there are no supermarkets in Africa. Even if we could ship food to Africa, transportation costs would be tremendous because there's no road system to distribute the food to everybody [22. . http://bit.ly...]. And even if we could give them food, who's going to pay for the costs of transporting the food to everyone in the continent almost every week inside a country that is insanely massive? The best thing we can do is to let Africa become sustainable by letting them use new technology that would allow them to be able to do so. . http://strangemaps.files.wordpress.com...; />From: . http://bigthink.com...But here's an interesting tidbit. Almost all of the farming in Africa is practically organic [23. . http://www.nytimes.com...]. It's because these people can't afford commercial chemicals to spray on their farms. But organic farming hasn't been able to support the people of Africa. What's the solution to world hunger? My opponent hasn't provided anything as an alternative solution to GMOs. Drought is a major problem in Africa. Organic food is not resistant to drought, neither is food produced with commercial farming methods. But a GM corn that is resistant to drought can fix the problem [23]. Disease is also a major problem and GM bananas are already showing that they are a viable technology to going around that problem. Issue of safety. My opponent keeps saying that GM technology hasn't done anything (present tense), but uses the issue of safety as it could create massive problems in the future (future tense). But my opponent is ignoring what GM technology can do in the future, and is ignoring that GM technology, while in use for more than 40 years, hasn't created massive safety problems in the past. I want you voters to realize this that my opponent has been weaving in and out of the facts to appease her case to the voters. But what she ignored is crucial. - My opponent keeps stating that GM technology could create safety problems in the future. But in the past 40 years when GM technology has been prevalent and 90% of all corn we eat is genetically modified, nothing of a widespread epidemic of disease has occurred from the GM technology. I have also shown that GM testing is a precise science that can stop plants containing any toxins harmful to humans from entering the food supply. I'd also like to say that allergens only effect a small portion, 1% - 2% of the population [24. . http://www.fao.org...]. And while allergens effect a small portion of the population, new research is showing that they can be cured permanently [25. . http://www.fmshk.org...]. So the notion that my opponent would like you to believe that genetic engineering produces something that enters the food supply, causing widespread disease and death is completely unfounded. It hasn't happened in the past or currently even with my opponent showing that Monsanto has an influence on test results. Testing procedures can always be more heavily regulated and supervised, ensuring that GM crops are considered much more safe in the future. - My opponent also keeps using 1 same source over and over again that says GMOs are unsafe (seedsofdeception. com), while I have shown plenty of sources that say say the opposite. The bottom line is that GM technology can do things non GM technology can't do. GMOs can solve world hunger while non GMOs can't. GMOs can allow Africa to become sustainable so that countries don't have to keep providing expensive foreign aid. GMOs can be created to include vitamins and nutrients like iodine that can solve iodine deficiency problems. GMOs can fix diseases like malnutrition. GMO testing is very precise and has not, nor will not, produce anything that could cause widespread disease in the future. GMOs are safe and they are beneficial.