>1. Overuse of the …cides a tolerance was added for Farmers aren't stupid. They're not wasting extremely expensive chemicals. The reason roundup use has grown

>1. Overuse of the …cides a tolerance was added for Farmers aren't stupid. They're not wasting extremely expensive chemicals. The reason roundup use has grown is because it has replaced entire spectrums of more harmful chemicals. Don't confuse increase in market share with increase in use. >Said overuse causes evolutionary pressure on "the stuff you don't want to grow there" That's no different from any biologic. Should we stop using antibiotics because resistance might occur? No. They should be used more intelligently. >Loss of genetic diversity You can insert a gene into any crop. That crop can be diverse or not. It's completely independent. Diversity is lost when farmers breed traditional (and organic) hybrid strains, not at the insertion of a single gene. >Also a still unclear topic is the stability of genetic modifications If you are worried about genetic stability, don't google "transposons". But seriously. Transgenic insertions are incredibly stable. They are selected specifically to be stable. We know exactly where insertions happen. In fact the entire patent process depends on this. >IMHO the more cost effective and long term sustainable path would be marker assisted breeding, Breeding is crazy expensive compared to genetic modification. Why limit our toolbox? Why force breeders to build birdhouses with sledgehammers on the moon, instead of a hammer and a nail?