Go newsweek.

Although this article gets a little bit polemical in a couple of spots, it pulls together a number of specific reasons why 'organic' farming that excludes genetically modified crops might actually be a pretty bad idea. Modern organophosphate pesticides replaced 'natural' products containing, for example lead, mercury, and arsenic in mobile, ionic (and therefore dangerous) forms. Crops that produce their own protein-based pesticides in low doses (and maybe in the future only in rapid response to infestation) are much, much safer.

The article below talks about a Canadian group that has invented an "enviropig" that has an extra enzyme in it's saliva (also produced in abundance by gut bacteria living in every human's stomach) that allows it to extract phosphorous from food. Traditionally, pigs have to be fed phosphorous supplements that mostly pass into their manure and wind up in streams. In the streams, those large amounts of phosphorous can cause uncontrolled algal growth that crowds out oxygen and kills lots of aquatic life. Thanks to genetic modification, the manure of the enviropig contains 75% less phosphorous.

The article also talks about Eliot Herman's work to produce less allergenic soybeans. Basically, Dr. Herman's lab (at the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center, where I work) has genetically modified soybeans to eliminate the chemical responsible for 65% of allergic reactions, and the beans still grow and yield just as well as non-GMO varieties. But, they don't kill babies, so I guess it's a toss-up.

Anyway, I just thought this brought an interesting perspective to the whole debate,