I agree with this and generally I am not against GM crops in theory. I think that: 1. Monocultures are bad. GM crops don't have to be monocultures but they gen

I agree with this and generally I am not against GM crops in theory. I think that: 1. Monocultures are bad. GM crops don't have to be monocultures but they generally are for a number of business reasons that have nothing to do with food production. 2. GM crops cross-pollenate thereby spreading patented genes to non-GM fields. The owners of these non-GM fields are then sued and forced to switch to GM crops. 3. GM crops business models are often built around vendor lock-in. Historically vendor lock-in has been bad for software development and I think we can extrapolate these results to farming. 4. Cross pollination to wild-type is generally disruptive to the environment short term (for example consider what happens when wild plants produce pesticides from a GM gene). The effects are probably no different than introducing an invasive species. Generally people see this as a bad thing (snakes in Hawaii for example) and create laws to prevent it from happening. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasive_species http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasive_species 5. There is a big difference between point mutations and transgenic plants. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgene http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgene I think GM crops can be developed, used in a safe manner and provide a great benefit to humanity, but that is not the current state-of-affairs. There are good reasons the EU regulates GM crops as much as they do.