An article in Grist questions the actual improvements due to the use of GMO seeds. http://grist.org/article/gmo-fail-monsanto-foiled-by-feds-supreme-court-and-science/
But GMOs took the biggest punch this week from academia: Tom Philpott highlights a USDA-funded study [PDF] by University of Wisconsin scientists who found that several types of GMO seeds (including Monsanto’s RoundUp Ready varieties) actually produce a lower yield than conventional seeds. Only one seed — a corn that produces its own pesticide to combat the corn borer — offers any significant yield benefit. In other words, planting most genetically modified seeds results in less harvest per acre than planting non-genetically modified seeds.Its worth following the links on this, the study seems credible. Nothing is black and white, I expect there are cases where a GMO product may be beneficial to crop yields, particularly in the short-term, at least maybe. But what is certain is that the large seed companies patenting these technologies, and using interlocking product strategies that Microsoft would be proud of, stand to make a lot of money. Corner the market on food production with a patent strategy, anyone? Queue the efforts to discredit the study.
