How the “success story” of genetically modified cotton in Burkina Faso fell apart.

https://qz.com/africa/1900035/the-lie-o ... source=YPL

Indeed, what a crazy good deal the company got for itself, on yield expectations vs actual production. Wow.

The hidden facts are similar to what I've read about GM cotton in India. It required a lot of fertilizer to produce good yields, and this is not possible for the smallholder farmers. They don't have the inputs that the crop required. Their own methods and level of input produced a better yield from the local varieties they'd been growing all along.

The sort of traits that allow a plant to be productive in poor soil conditions are often present in those old gene pools of landraces closer to wild relatives. I've read the same about some of the ancient grain types.

Articles like this and past events is what caused me to have a distrust in scientific research of any kind.
There have been many articles I have wanted to post on this and the other forum backing up a point of view only to look closer and find out the scientist was funded by the companies and or groups that others were against.
Anytime Monsanto or Bayer is involved in something like this no matter how good it looks someone is going to get screwed.
Another problem is wealth and prosperity creates population growth.
Many times in so called developing countries that population outgrows the ability for the country to support it.

The West African nation of Burkina Faso was once the poster child for genetically modified (GM) crop advocates. Its 2008 adoption of GM cotton for smallholder farmers was hailed as an example of how these technologies could alleviate poverty and food insecurity by protecting crops from pests and increasing yields.

Hmm...how good does cotton really taste? If this was about food security, why weren't they food? Cotton is and always will be a cash crop that benefits the big landowner, not the people picking it.