Often any of these chemicals kill the soil microbiology. The real problem according to regenerative farming advocates is the idea that dumping loads of artificial chemicals on to the field is some path to a solution. The alternative is to understand the living nature of the soil and feed it the way you would feed any other living thing.

So it is not a choice between “this chemical” or “that chemical” and many view that kind of thinking as the real problem. In this way the GMOs that you describe support that problematic kind of thinking.

That said, I am not familiar with what you describe. Which chemicals did not break down and how did GMOs allow us to use chemicals that do break down? I’d like to learn about that. Thank you!

This article seems to suggest GMO crops reduce pesticide use. Maybe we need to collect the data for both GMO crops and non GMO crops on pesticide use. But who should we trust to collect that data?

https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2020/07/new-stud...

Your article is about pesticide use. But I am talking about the increase in herbicide use. Monsanto’s “roundup ready” line of GMO products is intended to be blanketed with glyphosate (aka RoundUp), a powerful herbicide. According to the following study, glyphosate use increased 15 fold since the introduction of “Roundup Ready” products.

https://enveurope.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s12302-0...

Funny thing is, once people started blanketing with roundup, it didn't take long for roundup-resistant weeds to develop.

> Growing reliance on the broad-spectrum herbicide glyphosate has triggered the spread of tolerant and resistant weeds in the U.S. and globally [5–10]. To combat weeds less sensitive to glyphosate, farmers typically increase glyphosate application rates and spray more often [11–13]. In addition, next-generation herbicide-tolerant crops are, or will soon be on the market genetically engineered to withstand the application of additional herbicides (up to over a dozen), including herbicides posing greater ecological, crop damage, and human health risks (e.g., 2,4-D and dicamba) [6].

Roundup is used at tiny quantities. Yes 15 times as much is used, but that is still much less than a liter per hectare. And roundup strongly binds to dirt where nothing can get it until it degrades in about half a year. It degrades into common elements in the soil so it isn't making any difference.

According to this link, our original belief that it’s use is largely benign needs further study:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29117584/

Anyone can publish anything. Such as calling out the WHO even though they ignored most of the evidence. Then speculation about antibiotic resistance even though bacteria don't use the pathways glyphosphate targets.