This article, written by Joe Yogerst, originally appeared on the Los Angeles Times website.

As director of the food science program at Chapman University’s Schmid College of Science and Technology — and with nearly two decades on the faculty at the university — Anuradha Prakash is a leading authority on food science. She answered questions on the topics trending in her field at home and around the globe.

Q: What do you see as the top trends in food science?

A: On the global level, we are seeing a maturation of the food-processing industry. Increases in the standard of living in developing countries, dual-income households and the number of nuclear families are in part responsible for a growing and thriving food-processing sector because people are buying more ready-to-eat to food and demanding variety in the retail market vs. cooking at home from scratch. At the same time, one in eight people worldwide experience food insecurity and hunger. As the gap between the rich and poor widens, we see malnutrition at both extremes — extreme undernutrition and hunger, and extreme overnutrition and obesity coexisting.

Q: Are you seeing obesity and hunger coexisting in the same country?

A: In the same country, in the same city, in the same street. I come from a big city, Mumbai, and poverty and affluence, while so far apart in lifestyle, are geographically proximate. It’s in your face.

Q: Are you seeing this in the United States as well?

A: Yes, you do see it in the U.S. Maybe it’s not as blatantly obvious, but it’s certainly there. Micronutrient deficiencies and childhood obesity are more common here. Childhood obesity is really becoming a global phenomenon and the repercussions of that include a decrease in life expectancy, an increase in chronic diseases and the related increase in medical costs and loss of productivity and quality of life.

Q: What other global issues are hot topics at the moment?

A: The increase in the planting of genetically modified food and consumer concerns related to that. This is really a multifaceted issue. On one hand we have an increasing population — we are still going to grow to maybe 11 billion people — so we need to use all the tools that we have to produce more food. The FAO estimates that we will need 70% more food than we already have. Food production has plateaued. We are not increasing our yields the way we did 30, 40 years ago. How are we going to produce more food? Genetic modification is one way to increase yields, grow crops suitable for arid or high-salt soils.

Q: Should consumers be concerned with health risks or other problems with genetically modified foods?

A: Health-wise I have no concerns related to genetically modified food. I don’t believe it has an effect on your health. Ecology and environment-wise I think there are some concerns there, and we need to be cautious. Companies need to do their due diligence so that we don’t have unforeseen repercussions from planting genetically modified crops. Where appropriate, I think we should be using it.

What we need is an investment in agriculture, both conventional and new technologies, and using science and technology to ensure sustainable food production.

Q: What other trends in food science directly relate to the U.S.?

A: Food safety is going to continue to be a priority on a global scale and definitely in the U.S. You know the company that was responsible for the peanut butter [salmonella] outbreak a couple of years ago? Their executives got indicted. The Food Safety Modernization Act will bring more scrutiny of food safety measures for both domestically produced and imported foods.

In the U.S., consumers want foods with clean labels and “natural” ingredients.  They are demanding foods that are healthy yet taste good, convenient yet fresh. We will continue to see food companies respond to these demands.

But I think what is interesting socially and politically is this “right to know” initiative. You know it started in California with Prop 37 a couple of years ago. Washington also defeated that measure just like California did, but it will come back. Consumers will want to know and they should want to know. The question in my mind is how much do consumers want to know? Do they want to know that organic cheese is made with rennin, an enzyme extracted from the stomach lining of calves? Or that nonorganic cheese uses rennet, an enzyme made from genetically modified bacteria so that calves don’t have to be harvested for the enzyme? The right to know goes beyond genetically modified foods.

Perhaps in the near future, with smart-phone technologies, consumers can scan the QR codes on food products and it will bring up all kinds of details about the food — from whether the food uses genetically modified ingredients to whether the chicken was raised cage-free, whether the product is suitable for people with diabetes or what their sustainability practices are.