The reading posits that genetically modified food crops can offer several benefits, and provides three reasons of support.

The reading posits that genetically modified food crops can offer several benefits, and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor states that the issue is not as clear as the author explains. He concedes that there might be some benefits, but there are major drawbacks, too. So, he refutes each of author's reasons. First, the article avers that the researchers can produce better crops when they genetically modify them. The lecture opposes this point by stating that the modification might not necessarily improve the crops. The professor explains that it takes hundreds of years regardless of selective breeding to achieve a good breed in nature and researchers cannot just change some genes and belive that the result is going to be an improvement. Second, the reading asserts that the genetically modified food is safe. The professor contends that this is still a question. He explains that the companies that modify food do not publish the results of their research because they are afraid that the competitor companies copy their work. As a result, the science community does not have the ability to review those articles. And, that is why the safety of these types of food is still questionable. Third, the article claims that the genetically modified food will alleviate the food shortage. The lecturer refutes this claim by mentioning that this is not going to do much in developing countries. Even though it might increase the yield, the famine will still exist. This is because the problem in the developing countries is mainly due to bad infrastructure in distribution of food. Also, these countries rely on the revenue generated from the crop produced. And, having high selling but unstable crops will affect them negatively.