The net energy yield from this pathway, where glucose is broken down through several steps forming pyruvate, is molecules of atp and molecules of nadh.

2 molecules of ATP and 2 molecules of NADH

Explanation:

Glycolysis is the first step of cellular respiration (break down of glucose to extract energy) which occurs in the cytoplasm. Glycolysis is a pathway common to all living organisms- prokaryotes and eukaryotes, as it does not require oxygen to occur.

Glycolysis occurs in two major phases (ten steps) requiring 10 enzymes catalyzing each step; the energy-requiring phase and the energy-requiring phase.

In the energy-requiring phase, the starting molecule (glucose) gets rearranged in a series of chemical reactions, and two phosphate groups gets attached to it producing fructose-1,6-bisphosphate which is unstable, This modified sugar then splits in half due to its instability to form two different but inter-convertible phosphate-bearing three-carbon sugars (Dihydroxyacetonephosphate, DHAP and Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate, G3P). Because the phosphates used in these steps come from 2 ATP molecules, 2 ATP molecules get used up in this phase

All the DHAP molecules get converted to G-3-P in order to enter the next phase.

In the energy-recovering phase, the 3-carbon sugar (G3P) is converted into another three-carbon molecule called pyruvate, through a series of reactions. In these reactions, two ATP and 1 NADH molecules are made. This recovery phase occurs twice (one for each of the two isomeric three-carbon sugars, DHAP and G3P). Hence, a total of 4 ATP and 2 NADH molecules are produced in this phase.

Overall, Glycolysis converts one glucose (six-carbon) molecule to two pyruvate (three-carbon) molecules and a net release of 2 ATP molecules (4 overall - 2 used) and 2 NADH molecules.

"1. it should be, it has been for about 20 years, and it's really not much different in the end than breeding animals to have particular traits. there are always concerns about genetically engineered animals/plants affecting the environment in unexpected negative ways, but i can't think of an example where the fears didn't turn out to be baseless.  

first, as you point out, it would be a great advance in pharmacology, to be able to tailor drugs and their doses to me. the pros involve better medical treatment. the cons involve privacy issues like insurance companies denying coverage to people with genetic risk factors. looking at dna markers wouldn't affect the frequency of genetic diseases, but it would allow detection of them earlier. and ok, actually i suppose that if people used this information to avoid having children with genetic diseases, some might decrease in frequency."