Based on your question, it seems that you are skeptical about the intentions and awareness of those of us who have dedicated our lives to researching and developing GM crops. I’d like to address your question based on my personal experience.
I grew up in southeastern Arkansas, in a small farming town named Dumas, where my grandfather, uncles and cousins were and still are farmers. I worked in the cotton fields every summer, scouting for insect pests so farmers knew when to apply insecticides. If the pest population was bad enough, farmers would spray insecticides two or more times a week. I left Dumas to go to college and eventually earned a Ph.D. in microbiology.
After college, I went to work in the biotech industry. I remember, as Bt cotton was going through the regulatory process at U.S. Department of Agriculture, my family kept asking when that product would be available, because that meant fewer pesticide applications and less insecticide exposure to our family members and our farmworkers.
This product has a great impact on my understanding of my place in the world—to provide tools to help my family and other farmers. I applied for a job at Monsanto because I believed that using good science is the best solution to solve agriculture problems like controlling weeds, insect pests and plant disease. Monsanto was the leader in developing GM crops, and I wanted to be part of it.
I've been at Monsanto for 17 years, and the progress made in agriculture is staggering compared with what I experienced in the 1980s. Without the ability to use GM crops, farmers would still need to control weeds, insect pests and disease. For most, that would mean quitting farming or going back to applying pesticides two or three times per week.
Over Christmas this year, my uncle and I were having a conversation about activists trying to get rid of GMOs. He asked why anyone would rather eat food sprayed time and time again with pesticides than use GM technology. To someone like him, who has farmed with and without GM crops, it just didn’t make sense. I agree. For me, technology is the answer, not the problem.