Farmers operate for profit, business operates for profit. Show me where food is produced deliberately to lose money? The profit argument against GM foods is nonsence.

Considering harm to humans look first at chemicals used in conventional farming. It is the exposure to concentrated forms of chemicals or radiation that has more harm to humans than natural gene technology. The most harmful chemicals I have worked with were used for tomatoes in the 1960's. So harmful one must be completely suited with breathing aparutus and with total skin protection.

I worked under Dr Ghotel in the 1960's at HAC developing specialised forms of tomatoes. We used radio-active isotopes to knock out genes in an endeavour to find specimins to breed from to develop tomatoes for different uses - for salad, sauces etc; ripe and firm for market transport, all fruit to ripen similtaneously for mechanical harvesting etc.

These tomatoes were hybrid (gene selected from within the species).

There we have it,

The only valid argument against GM food is that people are fearful. The reason people are fearful is because the raving looney party AKA "the greens" have been cranking out a fear campaign based on "we don't know what might happen therefore it could be dangerous"

The analogy would be "don't step outside as you might be hit by a bus."

The answer is not to stay inside for the rest of your life but to make sure you stay out of the way of buses.

The moment I hear the "we can't risk our children" argument coming out, I know that there are no rational arguments left against GM and the anti GM crowd is all but running up the white flag.

If you want to live a technology free life, then feel free to return to the "cleaner" living of our ancestors where life expectancy was about 35.

News today. Kim Chance has found the non-GM canola market and secured it for Western Australia http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=49900

This market is for 3,500 tonnes of canola. To put this in perspective, Australia typically exports 1 million tonnes of canola per year. So this non-GM market turns out to be 0.35% of the total exports. Canada exports nearly 2 million tonnes of canola to Japan alone, making this non-GM market a drop in the bucket.

Kim Chance is depriving the half-million tonne Western Australian canola crop of a 20 to 30 % production increase to satisfy a measley 3,500 tonne market. Statesmanship of the highest order.

It would be great if everyone would read the story at below's url:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7529

Good grief, a conspiracy theorist of the highest order. Where on Earth do you find these things eftfnc? CGIAR after all is a group of agricultural research centres positioned in third world countries to improve food production in these countries. It focuses on crops of importance in third world agriculture. To accuse CGIAR of eugenics is just plain nutty. There is not a shred of evidence anywhere other than in Engdahl’s imagination to support this. Add to this, his comments about hybrid seed production show no comprehension of the realities of crop breeding. Engdahl seems to believe you can flood the world with a single variety of a crop. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are a myriad of microclimates across the world, where specific varieties perform better. That is why there are more than 2000 varieties of Roundup Ready soybeans marketed in the US.

Engdahl has some other odd ideas: including that oil is not a fossil fuel http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6880

Others have criticised the Svalbard facility, but on more sensible grounds. The world has hundreds of seed banks of crops across the globe. In this case dividing the world’s seeds is a better insurance risk than putting them all in one place.