Why I cut off my cable TV service in 2001 . . .

[Texano78704]

111. Wouldn't it be simpler ...

to post a link a scientific study? You know, something based on science.

"Then, there is the fact that not a single credible study ever conducted has found GMOs to be anything but safe – and that numerous food safety agencies in the U.S. and around the world have reached the same conclusion. Even the founder of the anti-GMO movement, activist Mark Lynas, has succumbed to an overwhelming torrent of scientific evidence and publically reversed his position."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/richardlevick/2014/01/09/are-gmo-free-cheerios-the-first-domino/


"The National Academies, the American Medical Association, the World Health Organization, the Royal Society and the European Commission are all on the same side. Although it’s impossible to prove anything absolutely safe, and all of those groups warn that vigilance on GMOs and health is vital, they all agree that there’s no evidence that it’s dangerous to eat genetically modified foods."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/food/genetically-modified-foods-what-is-and-isnt-true/2013/10/15/40e4fd58-3132-11e3-8627-c5d7de0a046b_story.html

It's science that tells us climate change is real. However, it seems to me that you reject that same science when you talk about GMO food.