Besides, the statement asserts that providing food for a growing number ofpeople is more urgent than the protection of environment. I find this statementtotally unconvincing. People’s survival depends on the environment. More oftenthan not, whenever the environment gets damaged, the deleterious effects arealways irreversible. In other words, once the environment on which we depend onis disrupted, our lives are placed at risk. Modern agriculture, although itprovides enough food, has contaminated the water and soil. When people eat cropsgrown with polluted water and soil, diseases will break out sooner or later.Genetically modified crops, although their negative effects are not obvious andnot yet confirmed, should also be treated with great care, for it is reportedthat dogs, cats, and other pets become sick after ingesting GM food. If humanbeings are negatively affected by modern agriculture, untold dire consequenceswill arise. People will suffer from diseases and the government will shoulderconsiderable medical bills. Worse, the society may become unstable andinharmonious.
From the above discussion, I can draw the conclusion that there are othermore effective methods to address starvation. No matter how much food weproduce, as long as corruption and wasteful use exist, there will always bestarving people. Besides, a healthy natural environment is a basic requirementof our survival. We cannot increase food production at the expense of ourenvironment, lest we are bound to suffer for our inconsideration andrecklessness.