 Recently, the prominent science journal Nature editorialized that we are now swimming in information about genetically modified crops, but that much of that information is wrong on both sides of the debate. But a lot of this incorrect information is sophisticated, backed by legitimate-sounding research, and written with certitude, equipping that with GMO's good gauge of a statement's fallacy is the conviction with which it is delivered. To many in the scientific community, GMO concerns are dismissed as one big conspiracy theory. In fact, one item in a psychological test of belief in conspiracy theories asked people if they believe food companies would have the audacity of being dishonest about genetically modified food. The study concluded that many people were cynical and skeptical with regard to advertising tricks, as well as the tactics of organizations like banks and alcohol, drug, and tobacco companies. That doesn't sound like conspiracy theory. That sounds like doing business. Minorities are blamed for conspiracist ideation for crackpot theories about AIDS, but we must remember there is a long legacy of scientific misconduct. Throw in a multi-billion-dollar industry, and one can imagine how hard it is to get to the truth of the matter about GMO's. There are social and environmental economic food security about diversity arguments, pro and con about GMOs, but those are outside my area of expertise, so I'm going to stick to food safety. And as a physician, I'm a rather limited veterinarian in that I only know one species, human being, so we'll skip the lab animal data, which may inform what to feed one's pet rat, but not necessarily what to feed one's family. What human data do we have about GMO's safety? This study was purported to confirm DNA from genetically modified crops can be transferred into humans who eat them, but that's not what the study found, just that plant DNA in general may be found in the human bloodstream with no stipulations of harm. This study, however, did find a GMO crop protein in people detected in 93% of blood samples in pregnant women, 80% of umbilical cord blood, and 69% of samples from non-pregnant women. The toxin they're talking about is an insecticidal protein produced by BT bacteria, whose gene was inserted in the corn's DNA to create so-called BT corn, which has been incorporated into animal feed. If it's mainly an animal feed, how did it get into the women? They suggested maybe through exposure to contaminated meat. Of course, while I get GMO secondhand, when you can get them directly, the next great frontier is transgenic farm animals, genetically modified salmon was first a vie for a spot at the dinner table. And then in 2010, transgenic cows, sheep, goats, and pigs were created, genetically modified for increased muscle mass, frankenfurters, one might say, based off the so-called mighty mouse model. But back to children of the corn and their mothers. When they say it's a toxin, it's a toxin to cornworms, not necessarily to people. In fact, I couldn't find any data linking BT toxin to human harm, which is a good thing, since it's considered one of the few pesticides considered so non-toxic, it is sprayed on organic fruits and vegetables.