We know that the modified seed is more expensive, and that farmer's claim that it does not significantly reduce the need for insecticide per acre. It also does not increase market value of the yield and is thus said to be unlikely to benefit farmers economically.

What would be useful information that would help us decide whether this is true or not?


A. Well whether or not they grew other modified crops is irrelevant to the economical feasibility of this particular cotton crop.

B. The cost of the insecticide compared to that used in other crops is irrelevant as we are only concerned with cotton. Also we are only able to compare amounts of insecticide used and not its cost.

C. Whether or not it is their primary crop is irrelevant to the argument of its economical feasibility as a modified crop.

D. We are concerned with amount of insecticide used PER ACRE and hence it is irrelevant whether or not the two sets of farmers planted different areas in acres.

E. Bingo. This addresses the concern that we do not have statistics about the amount of insecticide per acre that the farmers who used the modified seeds were utilizing before they tried the modified ones. What if before these seeds they were using a very large amount of insecticide as compared to the other farmers, and decided to try the modified ones and found it to greatly reduce the amount of insecticide needed? This would indeed indicate as to the economical benefits of such modified seed and would thus be useful information to know in order to evaluate the argument that this modified seed may not have economic benefits.

Pick E.

the quantity of insecticide needed for genetically modified is slightly less that that needed for normal seeds.....

what if the cost of insecticide is too high.......the difference in total cost could be high which might be more than the difference in cost of the different types of seeds......

IMO B....