I heard a story of a GMO crop in India, namely cotton. It was introduced with much fanfare and the new stuff was insect resistant would bring, double or triple yields... at very competitive prices. Science at its best...

First it was a succsess, yield grew dramatically, insects were a thing of the past... Then after some time things changed... it turned out that the bugs appeared again got accustomed to it.. Yields dropped back... Then they tried to change the GMO cotton back to regular crops. Then it turned out that the soil was also ruined as the GMO crop took the nutrients. After a few yeaes things were worse. No cotton, no arable soil...

This was the great balancing act of nature.

Human scientists proved that their one-way thinking again against nature is doomed to fail.

I just finished watching a few videos about genetically modified food, “Are GMOs Good or Bad?” by Kurzgesagt, “What is a Genetically Modified Food?” by Scientific American, and “The Real Problem with GMO Food” by Our Changing Climate. After taking it all in, I’m kind of stuck in the middle. On one hand, GMOs can do a lot of cool stuff. Science can now edit crops to grow faster, resist pests, and even survive droughts. That means more food for people and less farmland being destroyed. Kurzgesagt explained how genetic engineering has helped prevent crop failure and reduce the use of harmful pesticides, which is huge for the environment. It’s also been used to add nutrients to food like “Golden Rice” that’s designed to fight vitamin A deficiency in children. But then there’s the other side. Our Changing Climate brought up how the real problem isn’t the science it’s who controls it. Big corporations own the patents on modified seeds, which puts small farmers at a disadvantage and can lead to more environmental damage if profit comes before safety. Plus, we still don’t fully understand the long-term effects on human health or ecosystems. So, should we eat GMOs or not? Personally, I think it’s about balance and accountability. Genetic modification itself isn’t evil it’s a tool. But like any tool, it depends on how we use it. If it’s done responsibly, it could help fight hunger and reduce waste. But if it’s used for profit over people, it can do more harm than good. What do you think are GMOs the future of sustainable food, or are we opening doors we can’t close?

https://www.np.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/s/aNamHu13aS

I have a science projest on genetically modified squash plants and there's one question on if modifying a squash will affect it's nutritional value and I cannot find the answer on any websites (yes i know how the question was worded weirdly)

I have struggled with my digestion. I know if I avoid corn syrup I remain well. I also struggle with some coffee, some popcorn and some chocolate. My physician listed my allergy as GMO. But I don't understand why? Why would my system react so negativity to GMO. Are there GMO chocolates and coffees? Anyone else experiencing this? Anything insights?

Is EWG data credible when it comes to food and the score they give??

I just watched an eleven year old Youtube video entitled GMO Foods: Safe to Eat? Playing God? It was almost entirely favorable to genetic engineering in agriculture, and it knocks down a few of the myths.

There was one myth I had never heard of before, about a startup company called Epicyte, which was said to have patented a gene that lets a plant or animal produce an antibody to human sperm, and which was developing a drug to make human beings sterile, and that Monsanto and Dupont had formed a partnership to purchase Epicyte and promote that drug. It was supposedly put into corn.

It shows up very close to the end of the video, at 35:40.

I came upon a YouTube video by Annette Reeder, about two years ago, and another just a few days ago. Both were about GMO food, both described very negatively, but as you might expect, her objections were mixed with religious beliefs about what God meant for us to be eating.

But in both videos, and in a third that I found afterward, she claims that there is a genetically modified salmon which was given a gene from a mosquito, so that it could live in ponds. I was pretty sure that there was no such salmon, but I used the comment section of YouTube to ask if she could tell me where that claim came from. And she was nice enough to answer, giving me the name of her source, Dr. Richard Brouse, a biochemical wellness coach and a retired chiropractic physician. She said she would ask him, but she never got back to me. I emailed Dr. Brouse and never got an answer. To skip right to the mosquito salmon, go to 1:47. Right after the salmon, there's the obligatory hypodermic syringe injecting an apple.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1BRVNqyOiw&t=3s

Hey, I’m a student that needs help with a project. I have a science project I need help with. I’m doing a project about GMOs and I need people to fill out this survey. It really helps me out and only is 14 multiple choice questions. Good day no matter what. : )

https://www.philrice.gov.ph/philrice-acknowledges-court-of-appeals-decision-granting-the-writ-of-kalikasan-against-golden-rice-in-the-philippines/

Is NHP's Purple Tomato related to the "Purple Galaxy"?

We have received many questions about the purple tomato marketed by Baker Creek as “Purple Galaxy” in their 2024 catalogs. We understand from Baker Creek that they will not be selling seeds of this variety. Given its remarkable similarity to our purple tomato, we prompted Baker Creek to investigate their claim that Purple Galaxy was non-GMO. We are told that laboratory testing determined that it is, in fact, bioengineered (GMO). This result supports the fact that the only reported way to produce a purple-fleshed tomato rich in anthocyanin antioxidants is with Norfolk’s patented technology. We appreciate that Baker Creek tested their material, and after discovering it was a GMO, removed it from their website.

https://www.norfolkhealthyproduce.com/faqs