Technology, the mighty force which is created by the comparatively smaller, walnut-shaped human brain, has changed the landscape, redefined the natural resources and even diversified the food we human beings rely on. The opponents and the proponents both hold their own justifications and I deem that there is no black-or-white conclusion of this issue.
It is more likely that food shortage will undermine the wellbeing of masses less frequently if technology and scientific breakthrough improve the quality and range of choices. In the past when we human beings relied heavily on the rather limited sources of food, a spell of abnormal weather can pose a threat to the yield of the crops and the health condition of livestock, let alone the unpredicted climate change. However, the miserable past is no longer the case today. People are less prone to the impact of scarcity of the food supply and the quality as more food sources can be utilized with the advancement of science.
On the other hand, the skeptics think technology a two-edged sword and the potential risks of technologically-modified food can never be underestimated. The security of some food generated by technology has not been identified, thereby entailing some unpredictable consequences. The genetically modified food, a milestone in human history, provides more options of food and enhance the quality on the one hand, also induces the doubts on its potential harm to human body and health.
Personally, I suppose a reconciliation should be achieved between this two statements. What really matters on this issue is how properly the technologically- changed food can function in the society and what the following steps we shall take if some dire consequences arise. After all , it is the tiny brain that has the final say instead of the technology it creates.