You can't criticize one pseudoscience when supporting another.

[HuckleB]

211. That's not where it stops, however.

Anti-GMO activists repeatedly work to get the government involved in the matter, and have said they want GMOs banned, period. They are working to take away the choices of farmers, scientists, and everyone. Anti-GMO activists have worked to keep Golden Rice from the people for whom it can help. They are doing the same with the nutritionally improved banana that may help in Africa.

Also, it should be noted that GMOs have led to a decrease in pesticide use, and to increased food output per acre. These are good outcomes for everyone. They also lead to the use of less toxic herbicides. Another good outcome.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0111629

Finally, the anti-GMO marketing used by organic and other food companies is unethical, at best. It makes sense to criticize it, as it is fooling people into believing that GMOs are bad, and that other foods, which are no better, are good. This also leads to increased food prices, and stress on family budgets, without an actual justification.

Also, pushing bad science and pseudoscience as actual science is deplorable, and foments unnecessary confusion about what science is, how it works, and how to evaluate it.

It matters.