GE is literally orders of magnitude more expensive than other lines of agricultural research, with each innovation carrying a price tag in the tens of millions of dollars. There are many ways and they should all be explored. Yes, other ways offer greater potential returns. They should be studied, understood, and minimized. This is exactly what we are fighting for.
Unanswered questions remain, concerning both environmental and health risks.
It is a false dichotomy to suggest that there are only two alternatives, transgenics vs. chemicals. The issue of corporate control is what truly makes blood boil, not transgenic plants. It would be far more interesting to directly discuss the root causes of the disagreements, rather than looking for ecological arguments to argue against corporate control of agricultural technology. It is ludicrous, and perhaps even insulting, to cast aside concerns about research priorities under resource contraints, and about environmental risks and health, in such a blithe statement. Return to Logs of Conference 5 or go to the main Forum pages.