Genetically Engineered Foods' Tradeoffs

What are some of the tradeoffs of genetically engineered foods?
This is an area I have not researched sufficiently, but as most people, I am aware of the controversy. Can someone provide some good materials for this? Please no propaganda, just good scientific information.
Thanks!

This should be fun. What kind of trades are you anticipating? People starving in Africa vs not starving, or some degree of risk for autism or paying more for organically grown?
I have some more links to add, but January is a busy month for me. Click here.]

This should be fun. What kind of trades are you anticipating? People starving in Africa vs not starving, or some degree of risk for autism or paying more for organically grown? I have some more links to add, but January is a busy month for me. Click here.]
Thanks for the link. From what I have read already, my take is that its worth it. But I would still like a better collection of material than I already have. I also made this thread in case someone posts something I may have missed and if there really are any significant tradeoffs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_use_restriction_technology
Science and technology are indifferent. Implementation is everything.
psik

What are some of the tradeoffs of genetically engineered foods? This is an area I have not researched sufficiently, but as most people, I am aware of the controversy. Can someone provide some good materials for this? Please no propaganda, just good scientific information. Thanks!
This is similar to the anti-vaccination 'debate'. We've been genetically modifying organisms since domestication began, only we can do it faster now. Good things can be done with genetics and bad things can be done with genetics - having crops that can handle unlimited doses of herbicide and pesticide isn't bad but drowning the crops in herbicide and pesticide is bad. The risk to our health from genetically modified food is, as far as we know, vanishingly small. The risk to our health due to lack of food is quite well established.
What are some of the tradeoffs of genetically engineered foods? This is an area I have not researched sufficiently, but as most people, I am aware of the controversy. Can someone provide some good materials for this? Please no propaganda, just good scientific information. Thanks!
This is similar to the anti-vaccination 'debate'. We've been genetically modifying organisms since domestication began, only we can do it faster now. Good things can be done with genetics and bad things can be done with genetics - having crops that can handle unlimited doses of herbicide and pesticide isn't bad but drowning the crops in herbicide and pesticide is bad. The risk to our health from genetically modified food is, as far as we know, vanishingly small. The risk to our health due to lack of food is quite well established. I could see someone responding and saying that modifying it so fast is the issue. I'm not saying in anyway that this is a problem. However, what can we present to someone to show that there isn't an issue here.
I could see someone responding and saying that modifying it so fast is the issue. I'm not saying in anyway that this is a problem. However, what can we present to someone to show that there isn't an issue here.
The scientific research that says as much. Really, it's that simple. If some people are too ignorant to understand or choose to ignore the research, there's nothing we can do about that.
I could see someone responding and saying that modifying it so fast is the issue. I'm not saying in anyway that this is a problem. However, what can we present to someone to show that there isn't an issue here.
How do you tell people not to be afraid? Someone you should be afraid of would say "don't be afraid", so that's no good. This sounds like fear of the unknown, so the only answer I know is educating yourself. Unfortunately people are so afraid that when you show them studies, they say the studies are rigged. When you show they come from independent universities, they say the university system is rigged. If you show them the difficulties in buying off the thousands of people involved, they say it just proves how big the rigging system is.

More First World problems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_use_restriction_technology Science and technology are indifferent. Implementation is everything. psik
Are you saying there are currently ways that this is implemented that could have bad consequences?
More First World problems.
Actually, it's more the third world that benefits. I head somewhere that without genetically modified foods there isn't enough arable land to feed the people we have now, and it's not us first worlders who will starve if they're banned or restricted. As the world's population increases and the amount of arable land decreases, things will only get worse and the third world's need for GMO's will increase.

Whether GM stuff (not just crops but also more mobile organisms, e.g., mosquitos) may eventually have unforeseen negative consequences seems moot in regards to addressing critical needs now. But it seems to me that it is important to be vigilant for negative unforeseen consequences, since, if they should arise, they may need to be addressed, also.

More First World problems.
I guess you meant to say "Third" World. Anyway, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd worlds are parts of the same world. Currently the Americas (21 of them) have mosquitos that bear a virus that appears to be causing human micro cephalic births. If the conditions are right, i.e., if our climate in the southern U.S. warms up a bit, (as it seems to be doing, for some reason) those mosquitos may come to live here. There is a consideration to genetically modify mosquitos to try to combat this problem.
More First World problems.
Pretty sure he meant 1st world. In reference to being afraid of rapid change. Rapid change that has delivered food to a world that was starving. Look at the history of Norman Borlaug. Now, being afraid of how we sustain this population, that's a another story. Anyone can be afraid of that because it's almost impossible to have that conversation without getting into a discussion about who dies and who gets to decide who dies. The only solution that isn't zero-sum, that I see, is to view each and every individual as valuable and worthy of investment and allowing them to find the best match for their talents to the needs of the world. Something no ideology has never come close to suggesting, not even Bernie Sanders.

Here’s a current story on the GM mosquitoes that are being used to combat mosquitoes and their virus bearing capacities. http://time.com/4195980/zika-mosquitos-genetic-modification/

Are you saying there are currently ways that this is implemented that could have bad consequences?
I do not know much good consequence to terminator seeds. The point is to force farmers to buy seeds every year. It is another case of manipulating technology for economic purposes. But mono-cultures are an issue. psik
Are you saying there are currently ways that this is implemented that could have bad consequences?
I do not know much good consequence to terminator seeds. The point is to force farmers to buy seeds every year. It is another case of manipulating technology for economic purposes. But mono-cultures are an issue. psikYes, exactly. The technology is potentially one of the greatest lifesavers ever, yet the potential for abuse for money is also extreme. I shake my head at how many people suffer and die because others want to be more and more wealthy.
More First World problems.
Pretty sure he meant 1st world. Yes. Thank you Lausten. How hard was that to understand? It's actually a phrase that's used somewhat commonly. It's irony. Really sucks when you have to explain the punchline.
More First World problems.
Pretty sure he meant 1st world. Yes. Thank you Lausten. How hard was that to understand? It's actually a phrase that's used somewhat commonly. It's irony. Really sucks when you have to explain the punchline.Sorry, I guess there are two problems, 1) the problem of finding out all of the problems with GMOs and deciding if they are a force for good or evil and, 2) the actual problems with GMOs. I try not to be too dense, but I'm not always successful.
More First World problems.
Pretty sure he meant 1st world. Yes. Thank you Lausten. How hard was that to understand? It's actually a phrase that's used somewhat commonly. It's irony. Really sucks when you have to explain the punchline.Sorry, I guess there are two problems, 1) the problem of finding out all of the problems with GMOs and deciding if they are a force for good or evil and, 2) the actual problems with GMOs. I try not to be too dense, but I'm not always successful. So are there any good resources addressing these concerns? It may just be a tradeoff- like in the case of some countries in Africa, maybe the benefit will outweigh some of the other issues.