What's not fine with me is the persistent campaign to ban all GMO agriculture. I think everything should be labeled accurately. As for myself, a GMO label on a food product would not influence my decision to purchase in any way.

You may not be saying that genetic modification of food products should be banned, but others certainly are. I'd be fine with banning glyphosate use in agriculture, though. It's used because it's a cheaper way to kill weeds. Other methods are more costly and labor intensive. I don't have a problem with spending more for food if it creates jobs.

Again, though, it's not genetic modification that is the actual problem. It's the reason for the modification that is the potential problem. With glyphosate tolerance, the reason is unnecessary. Other means of weed control are available. Is glyphosate hazardous to humans in the minuscule quantities in our food? I don't know, to tell you the truth. But then, lots of things are hazardous in food, including some of the chemicals that naturally occur in some of the foods we eat.

As far as glyphosate is concerned, I'm more worried about its unregulated use by retail consumers. They tend to overuse the product in places where it can easily be washed into our lakes and rivers. Now, that worries me a lot. But that has nothing to do with genetic modification of food organizms. Nothing at all.

GMO foods do not cause cancer. Glyphosate, on the other hand, just might. Let's focus on the real cause.