To: cosmicforce who wrote (100085 ) 3/31/2005 4:34:21 PM From: Ish Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807 <<No, I meant your particular yield results being typical as compared to a control group's yield.>> Control groups in a study can be manipulated. Since 60% of the crops will be GMO, there's no real loss of yields in real life. Farmers don't plant to raise less and make less money. <<You are contractually bound to not use the crop you raise as seed stock, right? >> Right, although I did get away with saving a few bushels for seed for a few years. Saved seeds really don't produce as well as seeds grown to be seeds. I looked into open pollinated corn to plant at the hunting club and it was $60 per bushel cheaper than hybrid corn. The projected yield was 70 bu per acre as opposed to 160 bushel per acre. Now at a planting rate of a bushel per acre, that's close, and a price of $2.50 per bushel, I could save $60 per acre to miss an extra $225 in product. <<You assume most of the risk for committing to an over bred and virally infected seed stock in return for a short-term gain.>> Wrong!! the only difference between Round-up ready beans and other beans is the GMO beans have one LESS gene, the one that Round-up attacks and kills the plant. Same with the tomato that everyone was scared of, it was missing the rot gene. <<Organic farmers typically command higher crop prices at modestly lower yields, BTW. It is just a different and more sustainable way to raise crops. Soil conservationists, ecologists and many independent observers have made that case.>> That's the way all crops used to be raised. Now if we had 100 million people who wanted to work 12/7 for 6 months out of the year to make less than minimum wage it would be fine.