4 ms·

Concerning #1: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/30/business/gmo-promise-falls-short.html?smid=fb-share http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/30/business/gmo-promise-fall

Concerning #1: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/30/business/gmo-promise-falls-short.html?smid=fb-share http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/30/business/gmo-promise-falls... TLDR: "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"

sampo 10y ago
Several scientist have attacked and criticized/debunked that NYT article: https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2016/10/31/strawmen-selective-statistics-new-york-times-botch-critique-gmo-crops/ https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2016/10/31/strawmen-s... https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2016/10/31/danny-hakims-new-york-times-gmo-expose-misleads/ https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2016/10/31/danny-haki... http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2016/10/rehashing-tired-argument.html http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2016/10/rehashing-tired-argument.... http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2016/11/some-actual-yield-data.html http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2016/11/some-actual-yield-data.ht... http://www.forbes.com/sites/kavinsenapathy/2016/11/03/experts-slam-new-york-times-hack-job-on-gmos/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/kavinsenapathy/2016/11/03/expert...
- wott 10y ago
  I just read the first one. The guy is attacking this: > At the same time, herbicide use has increased in the United States,…in France, use of insecticides and fungicides has fallen by a far greater percentage — 65 percent — and herbicide use has decreased as well, by 36 percent. by answering this: > I have to say this comparison seems borderline disingenuous; the figures used to compare pesticide use in France vs the USA are convoluted and misleading. First, the data is presented in different units (thousand metric tons for France, compared to million pounds in the US), making a direct comparison nearly impossible. Oh boy... How does this address the point of the original article you quote? It does not talk about absolute values, it talks about evolution: increase on one side, decrease on the other one. Who cares about comparing absolutes values? That's a strawman. And he goes on: > Second, the pesticide amounts are not standardized per unit area, which is critically important since the USA has over 9 times the amount of farmland that France does; it would be shocking if the U.S. didn’t use far more pesticide when expressed this way. Same failure to address the point which was e-vo-lu-tion. > It is true that France has been reducing pesticide use, Ah.. so? > but France still uses more pesticides per arable hectare than we do in the USA. Because it is much more intensive agriculture and that's why there was no comparison of yelds. But a comparison of e-vol-lu-tions. And the yelds evolved the same way with and without GMO. But GMO users did not decrease pesticide use, and increased herbicide use, whereas non-GMO users did decrease both and yet kept their yields growing as fast. Jesus boy, how can you start your "debunking" article with such mistakes and fallacies...
AlgorithmicTime 10y ago
Because they're not chasing increased yield. They're chasing insect resistance, or tolerance to glyphosate, etc.

sampo 10y ago

Several scientist have attacked and criticized/debunked that NYT article: https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2016/10/31/strawmen-selective-statistics-new-york-times-botch-critique-gmo-crops/ https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2016/10/31/strawmen-s... https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2016/10/31/danny-hakims-new-york-times-gmo-expose-misleads/ https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2016/10/31/danny-haki... http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2016/10/rehashing-tired-argument.html http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2016/10/rehashing-tired-argument.... http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2016/11/some-actual-yield-data.html http://kfolta.blogspot.com/2016/11/some-actual-yield-data.ht... http://www.forbes.com/sites/kavinsenapathy/2016/11/03/experts-slam-new-york-times-hack-job-on-gmos/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/kavinsenapathy/2016/11/03/expert...

wott 10y ago
I just read the first one. The guy is attacking this: > At the same time, herbicide use has increased in the United States,…in France, use of insecticides and fungicides has fallen by a far greater percentage — 65 percent — and herbicide use has decreased as well, by 36 percent. by answering this: > I have to say this comparison seems borderline disingenuous; the figures used to compare pesticide use in France vs the USA are convoluted and misleading. First, the data is presented in different units (thousand metric tons for France, compared to million pounds in the US), making a direct comparison nearly impossible. Oh boy... How does this address the point of the original article you quote? It does not talk about absolute values, it talks about evolution: increase on one side, decrease on the other one. Who cares about comparing absolutes values? That's a strawman. And he goes on: > Second, the pesticide amounts are not standardized per unit area, which is critically important since the USA has over 9 times the amount of farmland that France does; it would be shocking if the U.S. didn’t use far more pesticide when expressed this way. Same failure to address the point which was e-vo-lu-tion. > It is true that France has been reducing pesticide use, Ah.. so? > but France still uses more pesticides per arable hectare than we do in the USA. Because it is much more intensive agriculture and that's why there was no comparison of yelds. But a comparison of e-vol-lu-tions. And the yelds evolved the same way with and without GMO. But GMO users did not decrease pesticide use, and increased herbicide use, whereas non-GMO users did decrease both and yet kept their yields growing as fast. Jesus boy, how can you start your "debunking" article with such mistakes and fallacies...

AlgorithmicTime 10y ago

Because they're not chasing increased yield. They're chasing insect resistance, or tolerance to glyphosate, etc.