I'm a little wary of the artificiality of it, of the uncertainty of the results of modifying nature.. DNA, biology, the ecosystem, etc. is way too complex to predict with certainty all of the ecological results of such a thing. And I'm a naturalist and purist and tend to think artificial things are inferior and unnaturally modified things are degraded forms of those things.

But I also think there's little chance of GMO foods being directly harmful to the people who ingest them because even a modified organic thing is going to produce only chemicals that are essentially organic, not comparable to lab-produced chemicals such as aspartame and partially hydrogenated oils.

I also realize that tons of the fruits and vegetables we eat have been already modified (though not quite in the same way) for decades or centuries through selective breeding.

But at the same time, I think it's wrong to deny people the choice by not requiring GMO foods to be labeled as such, as if leaving them in the dark about what they're buying is actually the wisest thing to do.. and I doubt it would even be a question if it weren't for big business's power to purchase legislation.

I read recently that GMO foods allow farmers to spray tons more pesticides on their crops, because the foods can withstand it, and I know that pesticides are bad news for other parts of the ecology, like bees for example. I don't know if that thing I read is true, because I thought that the whole point of GMO foods was that the foods produce their own pesticides so they don't need to be sprayed.

I've answered a similar question on kiwi before, "Are genetically modified foods safe?" here: https://kiwi.qa/inhahe/35654968686000177 ; I made a few points in that post that I didn't mention in this post.