Taking Think's suggestion and reading the recommended letter I get the jist of the thinking (while acknowledging that I may miss some points). However, I recognize some of the letter's discussion as familiar: first understood by me with the unfolding debate about antibiotics in medicine. These were the drugs that enabled our civilization to prosper and extended human life we were told. There were some who cautioned against less than very careful/selective antibiotic use but it has become clear (not only to me) that this caution was not heeded and now we have antibiotic "super-resitant" bugs and some with complete resistance (T.B.) to all known antibiotics. I could include in this scenario antibiotic use on animals, especially in large scale operations.

The point is, even though practicing physicians knew the overuse of antibiotics would have dire consequences, their interaction with other forces caused a turn from common sense to overuse. As I see it, these forces were the drug companies and their marketing strategies. It got difficult (for many reasons) to not give ampicillin to a child with a viral infection because the fearful mother who brought the kid in had also been marketed and propagandized (she might have had other kids and two jobs and wanted some relief but she believed in the miracle of antibiotics) . Perhaps, this is just how unrestricted capitalism works.

I think I can legitimately extend this unfolding about antibiotics into an analogy so that drug companies become Monsanto and the physicians become the
farmers (agribusiness ?). Profit motives are now taught early with all kinds of brave new world things and lots of marketing (spin as different from truths we eventually find out much later) to justify our actions--and all this is done "to feed the world." The drug rep's helped physicians rationalize in the same way.

I "think" the article says: maybe we should be careful trying to outsmart nature. I also feel we are not being careful. Some appear to have great difficulty with this feeling and what the consequences of not being careful may really be.

This page is a good illustration of the perils of technology outstripping human capacities to deal with it. I refer not to Bt corn, but to the rapid and vapid conversations that the internet facilitates. It may be that Monsanto is the Great Satan and that GMOs are the evil spawn of profit-mad scientists, but neither idea addresses the Gucciardi article or the reasoned comments above. Calling Mr. Smythe a minion of Monsanto does not speak to a single point in his argument and Mr. Cwynar's initial response utterly misses the point of Smythe's HIV/AIDS analogy. Perhaps Smythe's arguments are wrong, but nothing in the above shows that they are.

The most regrettable failing on this page is Gucciardi's article. It succeeds in distorting or misrepresenting most of the important points in the letter from 22 NCCC46 scientists to the EPA. Rather than review Gucciardi's errors I give you the URL for the letter. Click on the pdf. Draw your own conclusions. Please note that even if I am a Monsanto mole earning ill-gotten dollars from trolling anti-Monsanto websites, anybody with a high school or college education can read and understand the letter. Before you add to the above mess, you have a duty, to yourself and the rest of humankind, to read it. Let us know what you think.

http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0922-0013

TS shows himself to be a Monsanto paid blogger. Only someone on the payroll would argue so consistently for this flawed technology. Monsanto should be tried for murder for the deaths and harm they create across the globe in the name of profits. They are not in the business to feed the world, they are there to make money for their shareholders. That is their only motive and once people understand that then they will understand how Monsanto is able to get away with the damage that they do. They buy off opposition, pay for bloggers to trawl any site that mentions Monsanto to spread the lies of feeding the world, they finance underhand deals, finance poor and twisted science, They create death, disease and destruction in the bow-wave of making money. Monsanto is the pinicle of all that is wrong with modern capitalism.

I do not understand the cause for such alarm. The crops were susceptible to insect pests before the Bt gene was introduced so the development of resistance, which was predictable from the beginning is no surprise, and simply means that 'traditional' herbicides will need to be employed once again. The primary reason for development of resistance is the lack of employment of buffer zones by farmers, in violation of recommended practices.The need for introduction of multiple types of insecticide genes to combat the development of resistance is regular practice, in fact it is the same approach used to combat the development of viral resistance in treatment of HIV/AIDS by administering a cocktail of three antiviral compounds simultaneously.It would be really nice if protestors against new technologies had any idea of what they are talking aboutn including the author of this article.

T.S. suggests "protesters" don't have the facts when, in fact, his understanding of "gene insertion" as part of HIV/AIDS treatment is completely off base. What he doesn't understand is the difference between using different toxins to defeat an organism (shotgun approach) and insertion of a gene to effect organism damage/resistance. I think his use high-falutin terminology is clearly seen through as pro-Monsanto-ism. His philosophy shows through also: man is the "smartest" species around and can "think" himself out of whatever situation he gets himself into without a fuller understanding of his surround, without a positive connection to his surround--earth. Many peoples western civilization considers "primitive" get this idea. In the long haul nature will teach and we will learn whether we want to or not.

GM crops are set to fail as insects and 'weeds' adapt to their onslaught. More synthetic chemicals would be only a short term solution as oil and phosphates run out, while arable land and water are also depleted. Corporate ownership and control of the global commercial seed supply is also set to compound the problems of global food sovereignty and security. See seed industry ownership here: https://www.msu.edu/~howardp/seedindustry.html and here: http://www.naturalnews.com/files/seedindustry.pdf Large public investments are needed in genuinely sustainable agricultural and environmental management systems to feed us all, and future generations. Everyone in the world could be fed right now but geopolitics, unfair trade and social disruption distort food prices and supply, denying over 1 billion people their right to be well-fed and nourished. GM crops entrench, not solve, the problems of industrial farming.

Why was there no mention of the organ damage being done to humans by these GMOs? Are we not important enough? The USDA scoffed at the lawsuit brought by a group of organic farmers, even with the knowledge of organ damage in humans, genetically altered insects, USDA is still hell-bent on rushing the approval of Monsanto GMO ANYTHING, because Monsanto is losing money by being held up for approvals. I believe its time for a MAJOR shake-up at USDA! And FDA!

Besides the fact that Monsanto is contaminating every plant species that grows near it's GMO corn, we are headed to a disaster because we are relying on monoculture. All corn is essentially one variety now. If some pest or plague hits that one variety, all of the corn crops will fail. Using GMO corn has avoided the need for crop rotation, fallow periods, and use of grazing to refertilize the ground. In the long run, Monsanto will be rich and we'll be left holding the bag.

I am just wondering if you are aware of some correlation between the HIV/AIDS cocktail and farming practices, because I can't see the connection. There are many options available to farmers dealing with pest issues, such as crop rotation, creating healthier soil environments so the plants can better deal with issues with their natural immunities, planting complementary crops with built-in resistance, and natural bio-agents, all these things work, just not on the scale Monsanto thinks farming should be. The viral cocktail you mentioned is currently the best the scientific community can do to allow the patients to live a longer life but there are still numerous side effects to all this medication.

I do not understand the cause for such alarm. The crops were susceptible to insect pests before the Bt gene was introduced so the development of resistance, which was predictable from the beginning is no surprise, and simply means that 'traditional' herbicides will need to be employed once again. The primary reason for development of resistance is the lack of employment of buffer zones by farmers, in violation of recommended practices.The need for introduction of multiple types of insecticide genes to combat the development of resistance is regular practice, in fact it is the same approach used to combat the development of viral resistance in treatment of HIV/AIDS by administering a cocktail of three antiviral compounds simultaneously.It would be really nice if protestors against new technologies had any idea of what they are talking about, including the author of this article.

It's not safe to try to fool old Mother Nature.PeteBB

We have to continue to define what is "politically expedient" on this and many issues! This is a great start to blowing the lid off of the problems associated with Monsanto and it's cozy relationship with our government entities. And what better time? The country's tolerance for the establishment being used to create laws that work against us is very low. I don't believe it is hopeless. Look how much grass roots organizing has changed a myriad of policies for the better ! Carry on! Sign petitions, pass them around, write Congress and the White House, numerous times. Strength is in numbers and we don't need to look at the distant past to find many examples of this! Keep fighting and maintain healthy and "rational" political discourse that is information based! We are all better for it!

Excellent article. It is going into my collection.

Californians should be aware that a huge petition campaign is underway to have GM foods labeled. This is the most important and accessible action that a citizen can take. It will have global implications. Get on it by visiting http://www.labelgmos.org

If you need further convincing that additional testing of GMOs is required, Google the words "bt toxin unborn babies".

There *may* be good reasons for GMOs. I'm not a Luddite. But if pharmaceuticals must go through clinical trials and peer-reviewed analysis, why not the basic materials for human survival?

Labeling is a reminder to the providers that parents *do* care. It is a simple way of getting everyone to go back and double-check their work.

What's wrong with that?