I have issue with the author drawing conclusions from one side of the debate without including the other. A simple search on the internet will reveal credible sources that counter the author’s comments.
While I am not so gullible as to think that things on the internet are completely accurate, Wikipedia provides sources such as "The European Commission Directorate-General for Research and Innovation 2010." Other sources are found on this site along with a good discussion including research funded by Greenpeace which found some GMO crops to cause organ problems in mammals. However, this was refuted by The French High Council of Biotechnologies Scientific Committee which found the results to be due to chance alone.
Obviously, I think these products are safe. I believe the facts will not alter the debate from the other side. I think they will not be satisfied that we have enough science to consider these technologies safe or environmentally friendly regardless of what is done.
RandomCitizen, please elaborate.
This column is simply not based on facts.