Agronomist, you forgot to read the word I used which was "premise". As for being shot, that was obviously a joke, but it of course has an edge that is serious. Destruction is infinitely easier and quicker to achieve than creation. The price could be staggering to future generations and the current conduct of random trials and secrecy as it reaches the consumers who may want to have nothing to do with it, is arguably criminal. I'm all for genetic research and such but the conduct of governments so far is not so different from past mistakes, such as how in the last couple of decades people attacked environmentalists when they should have been listening very intentl to them. Why the secrecy and concealment from consumers? Why the open trials that have no regard at all for any side effects in the natural world? Both are not necessary. You know about the delayed effects of asbestos...this could be very similar to it, or worse.

Steel, no I didn't forget you used the word premise, I quoted it after all. Surely, if the premise was "entirely factual", there would be abundant evidence to support that premise? Why then could Vallianatos not find any real evidence and resorted to repeating stories that were wrong? Is there evidence to support your belief the the premise 'GM crops lead to feudalism' is "entirely factual" because Vallianatos provides none, or do you prefer to live an evidence-free existence?

Given your apparent inability to separate fact from fiction and your view that I am an "uneducated, opinionated moron", you will have to forgive me for not understanding your "joke" about wanting me taken out and shot. I have seen too much evidence of people not grounded in the real world living out their fantasies.

And no, GM crops cannot be anything like asbestos. You need a mechanism for disease; asbestos has one, GM per se does not.

Wait...did I read that right? You think GM has no mechanism? That's hilarious.

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/gm-food/dn8347-gm-pea-causes-allergic-damage-in-mice.html

Steel, no I didn’t say that. I said “GM per se had no mechanism”.

The peas in question included an amylase inhibitor. These enzymes stop us digesting our food properly, so you need to cook your beans properly. They are also known to belong to a class of proteins that produce allergenic effects. The peas were modified differently in beans compared to peas and that raised the possibility of increased allergenicity. The project was terminated when this was discovered. This is exactly the same natural process that results in a few people having allergy to cereals. This sort of change was detected as part of the requirements for approval of the pea.

http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2006/01/australian-gmo-trouble-troublesome.html

http://www.csiro.au/news/GMPeaStudy.html