Environmental activists are spending millions of dollars in their campaign to ban genetically modified foods, as millions of Africans starve. These activists, who must believe that ideology is a good substitute for bread on the table, need to understand some simple truths. Human activity is based on living a healthy life. Sufficient food is the first requirement for health, which gives people the strength to flourish and live productive lives. Hunger and undernourishment undermine human society, retard education, and destroy human social capital, which in turn brings technological change and economic growth to a grinding halt. Unfortunately, this has been Africa’s story for decades. Between 1997 and 1999, it is estimated that there were still 777 million undernourished people in developing countries. Out of this figure, Africa’s share is 194 million people. Today more than 25 African countries are facing food emergencies.For instance, in Angola and Sudan 1.9 million and 1 million people, respectively, are starving. This rampant hunger leaves people more susceptible to illness, especially pregnant women and nursing mothers. In turn, newborns often come into the world underweight and sickly, and this can affect their health throughout their lives. Investment and risk-taking are essential for economic growth, but people who live on the edge of starvation are unlikely candidates to start businesses, engage in trade and follow other pursuits of the entrepreneur. People who live on the edge of starvation operate in survival mode, and the last thing they can contemplate is a risk of losing their meager earnings. Along with widespread suffering and illness, starvation of a population adversely affects prosperity and economic growth. In spite of all the problems directly associated with hunger, one continues to wonder why the attack that genetically modified foods has been subjected to by environmental activists continues in many part of the world, especially in Nigeria. The refrain has been “No to GM food” and “We would rather die than eat genetically modified food.” This is coming from the anti-GM activists who are doing fine, while majority of the Africans are languishing in malnutrition.Genetically modified organisms have been a fact of life in food production since man moved away from hunter-gatherer subsistence. The first conscious effort at genetic modification in agriculture is attributed to the 19th century Austrian Monk, Gregor Mendel, who systematically crossbred sweet peas. Genetic modification helps transfer desired traits between plants more quickly and accurately than is possible in conventional breeding. Modifications usually involve changing one gene of the 30,000 to 50,000 odd genes that make up an organism. Many of the problems facing agriculture in Africa are associated with land degradation, low farm yield and hordes of crop diseases. Take, for instance, fungus that prevents photosynthesis or nematodes that destroy crop roots, a pest now affecting the Ugandan banana. But with new GM foods technology, we could achieve beneficial crop variation that would be suitable for diverse and low growing locations. Unfortunately, all this is in doubt because of anti-technology activists who often rely on the absurd doctrine of the “precautionary principle” to deny the world’s poor the benefit of any invention – thereby aggravating their predicament. Biotechnology promises great benefits for both producers and consumers of agricultural products, particularly in Africa. It has the potential to speed up the development and deployment of improved crops and animals. Marker-assisted selection, for instance, increases the efficiency of laboratory-based conventional plant breeding by allowing rapid analysis of thousands of possible outcomes without the need to grow plants to maturity in the field. The techniques of tissue culture allow the rapid multiplication of clean planting materials of vegetatively propagated species for distribution to farmers. The World Health Organization (WHO) has asserted that GM foods currently available on the international market have passed risk assessments and are not likely to present risks for human health. In addition, the WHO has detected no negative effects on human health as a result of consumption of such foods. In fact, GM has been subjected to more rigorous testing and trial than conventionally bred counterparts, and is safe for consumers. The evidence from WHO has failed to assuage anti-biotech activists. Even when farmers use biotech to produce products merely to feed their families, anti-biotech activists would condemn that. Green activists have been spending a lot to deny people the benefits of bio-tech. The anti-GM movement spent $500 million between 1996 and 2001. Half a billion dollars would have gone a long way toward feeding the malnourished men, women and children in Africa. Instead, the money was wasted on activities that have no economic benefit to Africans. African agriculture is facing the growing encroachment of urbanization, industrial expansion and an expanding transport infrastructure. Deforestation and the cultivation of fragile ecosystems is also leading to soil degradation. Genetically modified food technology can help us cope with these problems, and should be encouraged. To deny life-saving biotechnology to the people that need it most in Nigeria and other parts of Africa is tantamount to denying them the opportunity to live a decent and healthy life, much less the economic development that is necessary to advance a nation. Embracing biotech is one of the best ways to end hunger in Africa. In doing so we affirm the innate dignity of all people, all of whom bear “the image of the invisible God.” We started with simple truths. Now, some simple questions: How many of the environmental activists seeking to ban GM foods in Africa have suffered the slow, agonizing effects of malnutrition and starvation? How many, in fact, have even missed a meal lately? And how many of these activists have buried a friend, a family member, or even a child, who before their very eyes starved to death? Rev. Michael Oluwatuyi, an Anglican priest, is program officer at the Institute of Public Policy Analysis in Lagos, Nigeria. He may be reached at mikenero2002@yahoo.com.