"increase in yields was predicated on an increased use of pesticides" that is as useful as Americans saying that keeping the US price of petrol in the car is justification for causing the deaths of millions throughout the world.
If the billions spent on GMOs had been spent on reversing the desertification & redistribution of food in the world there probably would be even greater food surpluses than already occurs & no deaths from famine. That however results in benefits for all not just avaricious shareholders.

@FrayedBear The gas analogy makes absolutely no sense to me. Obviously the thinking is spending money on redistribution or supply chain would have alleviated mass starvation. What is not taken into account is the simple fact that the demand has and continues to outstrip the supply. We live on a finite planet with finite resources. Also, desertification is a part of the climate change which is caused by human numbers and activities. Anything else is just plain denial.

@JackPedigo Please go and read some of the articles in the following link:

[duckduckgo.com]

See my reply to Jack above.

Of course, create a monopoly and create a bigger profit margin. Years ago a group of us with an amateur orchardist group went to N. Italy to see how that country managed fruit production. Being amateur we advocated strictly organic methods. We were invited to hear a talk given by several scientists in Padua (one thing pushed by numerous universities in Europe was to have ag. courses in English). They went on and on about how much work they had done to create pesticides and herbicides and were upset that the local townspeople did not appreciate or use their advice.

Also, pay no attention the that man behind the curtain above.

Proving illegitimacy may be difficult.

See my response to Jack above.