Please,  don't mix  not careing with not being able to prove.   We have a a great system that checks out food safety.  I have faith in it.  You want a label that says GMO  fine,  add it down there with monsodium hydrate and the other 50 items 99% have no clue about.

The 1/3 waste  is a nuts number when it comes to the grains that are typicaly GMO at the moment.   Grians store and keep well with little spoilage or waste.  Take corn,  the big "GMO" issue  over 98% of corn is processed into things that keep perfectly well with little waste.    Look at corn used for ethanol.  once the ethanol is extracted,  the leftover meal is processed for cattle food.  do we get to double up for 2 products for 1??
Waste is also an intersting subject you could make the argument the waste is the consumer issue,  not blame it on the producer.  AND  should you by the argument our food is too cheap,  contrast that with the fact you commented even more food is wasted in less developed countries.
The author of the paper was simply argueing that maybe GMOS were not needed because we don't need a yield bump.   Well then  you also ned to stop population growth,  or farm more acres.  choices are not mentioned in the article.
feel free to tackle waste,  but who are we to decide farmers don't need to produce more form less?  should we also lomit the hours people can work, as they don't need  to be so productive???

Charles  

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html