/sci/ - Science & Math

Q:So /sci/, tell me why so much of the developed world is so anti-science on GMOs? The overwhelming scientific consensus in Europe, Japan, North America, and elsewhere is that it is no doubt safe

A:The problem is proving GMOs are bad is that they work in very complex systems and self replicated and mutate, so testing the hypothesis of them being safe is nearly impossible. This does not mean we should blindly call them safe, like we do. I like to be careful with things this important. What we do know and can say is there is a numerous cases with very strong correlations between GMO and death, contaminated surrounding systems, increases genetic homogeneity (which is bad in this case), has not so far increased yield or drought resistance to a significant effect as promised and can not violate conservation of mass and energy, allows patents to be used as weapons and other social economic problems. By the way OP, Japan has a strict no GMO rules. Interesting correlation, places that restrict GMO have not been affected by the odd drop infertility that has been growing since shortly after GMOs went to common markets. In fact there is a huge amount of doubt they are safe, just very little proof do to how hard it is to test these hypothesizes. But as you may know correlation does not mean causation, therefore no real proof, though for many of these I would say it good enough to warrant not using GMOs.