Your point is well taken but I think it illustrates mine as well. There are serious problems with allowing a small non-elected group of people to represent the

Your point is well taken but I think it illustrates mine as well. There are serious problems with allowing a small non-elected group of people to represent the interests of all humans regarding agriculture. But anytime anyone tries to bring this up the discussion very quickly falls back into the realm of science- is it safe? Is it better for the environment? There is a set of separate (and in my opinion more important) social issues that should be discussed and decisions that should be made but it isnt happening because of the diversion of the science. People who love science have an obligation not just to decision making based on evidence but also in considering the ethics of those decisions and the resulting consequences.