This maybe true to a point but, GMO’s have only been used for corporate gain as what I have seen. Monsanto for instance has used this process for patenting it’s seeds for monopolizing the market and selling more chemicals. Many of its gmo seeds are developed to withstand herbicides. There have been many test on its plants that have proved dangerous. Scientists who have proven this have had their careers ruined. If gmo’s were produced more ethically I would might be on board. Also, crossbreeding is not the same as genetically modifying.

This maybe true to a point but, GMO’s have only been used for corporate gain as what I have seen. Monsanto for instance has used this process for patenting it’s seeds for monopolizing the market and selling more chemicals. Many of its gmo seeds are developed to withstand herbicides. There have been many test on its plants that have proved dangerous. Scientists who have proven this have had their careers ruined. If gmo’s were produced more ethically I would might be on board. Also, crossbreeding is not the same as genetically modifying.

To merely select the best characteristics of a plant and encourage these in their growth is nothing more than speeding up natural selection; same things with animals (creating new dog breeds, etc). To splice genes of one plant into another without sometimes fully understanding the nuances of the results (creating food allergies, etc) is quite another.

I will agree that GMO's are not bad. But, putting a jellyfish gene in a tomato and getting a patenet on it and then making it so the seeds are not viable is just greed and there I draw the line. Do it as Mendal did and I have no problem.

I agree that the GMO process in itself is fine, and probably necessary, but corporate greed is rampant and companies like Monsanto need to be strictly controlled. They attempt to stack the deck at every opportunity gambling with consumer's health to maintain their profits, to make sure that people continue to buy their glyphosate, which has invaded all the foods we consume in epic proportions. If this is not dangerous then I don't know what the fuck is.
The suggestion that companies put GMO on their packaging I think is very reasonable, it allows people to make up their mind what they will put in their bodies. The industry's fight against labeling is evil and self serving, IMHO

[vanityfair.com]
[theguardian.com]
[huffingtonpost.com]

Ibet Neil would be fun to get drunk with

Thank you for posting this discussion! I have engaged with many people, some even on Agnostic.com, who believe that GMOs are just plain bad, and they use the examples of DDT and tobacco as evidence that scientists cannot be trusted. Much like the anti-vax'er movement, the anti-GMO crowd behaves like a religion!