Less than Zero Sum

BRT has talked about the possible dangers of GMOs in terms of how messing with DNA in a quantum reality could become rather dangerous to say the least. What was not discussed was the fact GMOs, made by Monsanto, Bayer and other entities, do not increase food production nor do they reduce the use of pesticides as nature always finds a way to do end arounds as seen by the renewed success of the Corn Borer Beetle vs Monsanto's GMO based corn product.

But an extensive examination by The New York Times indicates that the debate has missed a more basic problem — genetic modification in the United States and Canada has not accelerated increases in crop yields or led to an overall reduction in the use of chemical pesticides.

The promise of genetic modification was twofold: By making crops immune to the effects of weedkillers and inherently resistant to many pests, they would grow so robustly that they would become indispensable to feeding the world’s growing population, while also requiring fewer applications of sprayed pesticides.

Twenty years ago, Europe largely rejected genetic modification at the same time the United States and Canada were embracing it. Comparing results on the two continents, using independent data as well as academic and industry research, shows how the technology has fallen short of the promise. 

So, the end result of using GMOs is ...

1. No greater yield
2. Production of more expensive food crops controlled by big corporations and 
3. Increased use of pesticides that indirectly & directly kill bees, butterflies and other friendly insects thanks to products like Monsanto's Roundup and Bayer's Imidacloprid (a neonicotinoid insecticide). 

Sounds like less than Zero Sum, right ?