Most scientists are saying they are safe, and normally I would agree with scientists. So why the skepticism about GMOs? I really don’t doubt that they’re safe for human consumption, but what does bother me is that they might not be safe for other organisms in the environment. For example, a crop can be bred to be pest resistant. But the “pest” was a part of the natural environment. What happens to the food chain as a result? What if an organism cannot tolerate the thing, and by the time we found out, a major species (like honey bees) is extinct? Other crops are herbicide resistant, but then what happens is that weeds evolve naturally to also be herbicide resistant. So more types of herbicides have to be developed, and it’s a never ending cycle. The argument is that plants have always been modified, but I think there’s a major difference between creating a never-before-seen species (corn with fish DNA for example) and naturally hybridizing plants over thousands of years, giving the habitat time to evolve alongside the plants in question.
I agree with scientists about many (most) other things–climate change, vaccines–pretty much everything else. Just not this one thing. I think more research is needed before diving in.
Also–about crop rotation and variety: the only thing grown here anymore is corn and soybeans, and California is in a drought. Wouldn’t it make sense to start growing a variety of crops in this region again? I believe things should be turned back over to individual farmers–family farms–instead of pesticide/herbicide companies. The focus should be on food quality, not just quantity.