The general consensus is that capitalism has won and multinational corporations exercise undemocratic influence to manage international trade. For example Novartis, Monsanto, and other corporations have developed understory GM crop, such as coffee engineered to grow faster, which have indirectly contributed to the destruction of the rainforest.

One can argue that such products, say crop or fish, possess a high level of proteins capable -even when individually considered- of controlling the starvation problem. Any nutritionist, however, will tell us that the key to good nutrition is a balanced diet. Moreover, the so-called 'biopiracy' has caused, by means of shifting a few strands of DNA, a mutation of rice that has existed in India for thousands of years. And what is even more worrisome is that some countries, as occurred in Chiapas (Mexico), have sucily declared themselves biopiracy free zones.

These new high yield varieties are sold and marketed to developing countries, and the World Bank gives loans to buy these products. If one could establish some responsible limits and these corporations could be reformed, no complaints should arise. But the World Trade Organization behaves just as a puppet of multinationals because these countries have huge foreign debts they have to make interest payments on, without any possibility of generating currency. They turn their forests and fisheries into cash, what makes the third world even more dependant on the first.

Such humanitarian data could seem 'suspicious', but the above facts could advise that researches of the GM food impact on the environment should be performed at a lesser and -if possible- controlled scale. (By the way, Nature has been employing a very elapsed period of time to get a sustainable development.)