Some comments about your asserptions:
>Among the many comments in this article that are misleading or just plain wrong, the following stand out and require commment.
Sorry, but you made the same mistakes. Some of your comments were misleading and plain wrong too
>new genetically engineered seeds require high-quality soils,
>enormous investment in machinery, and increased use of
>Blatantly wrong. The key genes have been introduced into widely used
current varieties and require
no more special treatment than do the traditional versions of the same varieties. In fact, the insect
resistant crops require much less chemical.
Based on what can you say they are wrong? Most varieties are developed
to high yields in ideal conditions. They are not suitable for marginal
soils. If you introduce key genes and reduce the diversity, it is logic
to suppose that you are going to use more chemicals as it is also logic
to suppose the crops will be more vulnerable to diseases and plagues.
>There is evidence that their per-acre yields are
>about 10% lower than traditional varieties (at least in the case
>of soybeans),[1,pg.84] ..
>Also wrong, the clearest evidence of which is that growers are so happy
with yields that they are
planting even more land to the crops.
Planting more does not mean producing more. It may mean to expect higher
profits in the next season, or many other things. It is logic to suppose
that if a plant uses more energy in producing chemicals to protect itself,
it is going to be less productive. The plant diverts energy that would
be used to produce seeds to protect itself.
>The plain fact is that fully two-thirds of the genetically
>engineered crops now available, or in development, are designed
>specifically to increase the sale of pesticides produced by the
>companies that are selling the genetically engineered
>Perhaps true but certainly misleading. The farmers may be using more
of Monsanto's herbicide but
they are using a lot less of the competition's pesticides, which are generally more persistent.
Why misleading? The companies are interested in increasing profits not in altruism. It is obvious that they want to monopolise whatever they can (or the regulators allow them to) as this is the easiest way to increase their profits. Any graduate in Economics can tell you that.
Luiz Camargo de Miranda
begin: vcard fn: Luiz Camargo de Miranda n: ;Luiz Camargo de Miranda adr: R. 20, n. 238, apto 1501, Centro;;;Goiania;GO;74030-110;Brazil email;internet: firstname.lastname@example.org title: MSc tel;work: (062)2242488 tel;fax: (062)2255035 tel;home: (062)2122586 x-mozilla-cpt: ;0 x-mozilla-html: TRUE end: vcard