During the last century, the world population tripled to 6 billion. While food production has increased accordingly, some 800 million people, primarily in the developing world, still do not have access to sufficient food. Forty thousand people die every day from malnutrition, over half being children under the age of 5. In addition to lack of food, deficiencies in micronutrients, such as vitamins and iron, leading to illness and death are widespread. The World Health Organization estimates that the earth's population will reach 9 billion by 2050. The vast majority of this increase will occur in the developing countries of South East Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, and it is estimated that >50% of this population will live in urban areas. To meet this challenge over the next 50 years, we must double-to-triple the production of food on, essentially, the same area of land in the face of decreasing water supplies and with respect to the environment. This will be made more difficult by the consequences of global warming, such as increased climatic variability, changing patterns of rainfall and new pests and diseases. At the same time there must be a cessation of wilderness erosion to protect biodiversity and maintain ecosystems. Since the 1970s, the world has also seen a revolution in our understanding of how organisms function at the molecular, biochemical and physiological level. An integral part of this revolution has been the development of technologies that allow the transfer of genes from one species to another. Many scientists believe that the application of biotechnology to agriculture?together with plant breeding and improved agricultural practice?may provide solutions to some of the challenges outlined above. We do not claim that GM crops will feed the world or eliminate poverty. But in order to both satisfy the environmental concerns that come with modern agriculture and global warming, while still feeding the increasing world population in a sustainable and nutritious manner, we must assume responsibility for fully evaluating this technology for future generations. As with many new technologies, people are keen to embrace the benefits but reluctant to accept potential risks. The manner of introduction of GM crops onto the market has led to widespread loss of public confidence, which has been exploited by non-representative groups and activists for their own political ends. Some hypothesised threats of GM crops to the environment are elevated as being more important than the security of mankind. And the future that the critics offer is bleak: hard-won knowledge is rejected in favour of ideology. They require an absolute safety guarantee for GM crops, but such a warranty cannot be given since we can never know everything about anything. Thus, a standard of absolute certainty will effectively stop the attainment of the benefits of this or any other technology. As well as the ethical obligation to do no harm there is an obligation to strive for good in an imperfect world. Many of these concerns were submitted to the US Environmental Protection Agency in 1997. In their response, the EPA thoroughly addressed each of the questions raised (EPA, 2000). Our own response is unfortunately limited by space. However, we wish to address the most important criticisms that opponents of GM crops make to try and block their introduction.