As said above, it's the reason for the modification that concerns me more. Technology notwithstanding, lab GMO isn't a huge change from what has been done with husbandry for centuries, but when "they" alter something such as corn to make it survive dumping incredible amounts of herbicides or pesticides, that's concerning, because ag chemicals are really dangerous to most life, some even when used correctly ("correctly"). The USDA has and still does an incredible amount of research but it's not enough and sometimes erred on the side of profitability rather than the more sensible approach to overall safety as the EU tends to favor. In the last couple decades we've seen more evidence of that (and it of course extends to many other chemicals and products of chemicals). Some may remember Alar in the 1970s, or chlorpyrifos in the 90s...those are both great examples and indicators of why caution is needed.
Also as said above, it's sad that we have always put humans so far above and ahead of other living organisms. Society as it is now with fewer farmers, we do need to think about yields and profitability and the ability to keep food flowing and affordable (?) but still after all these centuries we do not fully understand and appreciate the web of life and how everything is interconnected...why even things we don't like still have a purpose and shouldn't necessarily be eradicated for our own benefit alone. These aspects are the main approach to GMO and why I try to steer clear of those food products, generally. Honestly our entire food industry is kind of alarming in almost every aspect these days...so very different in just 50 or 60 years, and mainly concerned with preservation as opposed to fresh (i.e. waste/yield). I don't think it's a smart approach.
So...GMO isn't inherently bad, but what we do with it is where the concern is, imho. I for one am glad that so many people in past generations took the time to modify some plants to make them safe and edible (tomatoes being the most obvious thing of several...that's a plant family that is bad news for most of its members).
“”GMO crops”:GMO Tomatoes: A Common Misconception | GMO Answers available in the United States:
alfalfa
apples
canola
corn
cotton
eggplant
papaya
pineapple
potatoes
soybeans
squash
sugar beets and
sugar cane”
wheat, tomatoes, and chicken are not GMO
but they have other issues… lol
Yep, GMOs are in a lot of foods.
I'm surprised so many people avoid GMOs, but at least no one is getting into an argument. 
I think it has a lot to do with the demand 7 billion people put on the planet. If people used common sense and not have nine children, we may not be in the mess we are in today. There is only so much space on the planet, only so much oxygen, and only so much food that can be grown. I think GMO represents the industry reacting to the demand that cannot be met using old school methods.
Lake Meade is at its lowest level in history. They “blame” this on global warming. Of course overdeveloping the area had nothing to do with it.
Don’t laugh but the solution is really life on Mars. So in 100 years when it happens, we can all sleep easier. Take a jacket, I hear at night it reaches –200F. Too bad, since there is no atmosphere, that means there are no trees to cut into firewood. Oh well. We are just gonna have to rely on oil and gas for heat.
The gravity on Mars is 0.375 than that of Earth.
Does anyone really think that most humans will do well long-term with that weak of gravity?
We’ll probably have to be genetically modified. 
Genetic modification is a technique, the technique itself is not inherently bad for you, but I can think of genes/proteins that I do not want in my food. So it al depends on which modification and why.
The Round-up example is tricky, it may have reduced overal pesticide use but the other side is that the stuff is not good for the environment and Monsanto created a clever dependancy on their products which gave them way too much power.
We're all going to need 2700K Osram throwers, too. Have you seen the dust situation up there??
As far as world-food...politics and economics have an awful lot to do with the situation, too...probably still more so than yields.
So I hear, it actually increased the use of glyphosphate (Roundup or otherwise) and additionally it allowed the use of higher concentrations of it. They can literally flood the plants and soil with it...the crops can "handle" it and all of the target species cannot so even the resistant species die. Yes, that does create additional environmental issues even though it's a chemical that has a pretty short half life and lower transport. And it didn't halt the growth of Dicambra use, either, which is a whole other story. The patents...oh man...what a mess a dollar can make.
bananas are non GMO, at the moment:
I agree. Crops engineered for glyphosate and/or 2,4-D resistance are a major concern. Many food products have been found to contain these herbicides.
Glyphosate Contamination in Food Goes Far Beyond Oat Products
amazing what people will do, when money is at stake
“Oats are not a genetically engineered crop. But glyphosate is increasingly being used as a “dessicant” to dry out crops to speed harvesting.May 1, 2016”
“glyphosate is also sprayed just before harvest on wheat, barley, oats and beans that are not genetically engineered. Glyphosate kills the crop, drying it out so it can be harvested sooner than if the plant were allowed to die naturally”
Okay, I don't care about GMOs or organic food that much, but here's some info a lot of people don't know.
https://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/features/organic-food-better
Avoiding GMOs, or just eating organic food, is no big deal because it isn't dangerous to anything other than your wallet, and people waste money on stuff all the time.
But that is missing the point that GMO’s cause environmental damage.
I do not know are GMO dangerous, but GMO tomatows has plastic taste.
I think some do, but most don't.
(Of course the GMOs that cause environmental damage are bad.)
I should rephrase what I said. GMO’s, as well as many other activities of humans CAN cause environmental damage. We, humans, too often forge ahead with changing things, trying to change nature, without fully understanding all the effects.
A GMO crop can reduce the amount od pesticides or herbicides that are used. Good. But if that causes disruptions to other parts of the environment, not so good.
We are between the devil and the deep blue sea, as the old saying goes. Billions of people need food. GMO’s help production volume.
So I feel better with organics because I can get them more or less with ease.
I hear that eating certain meats, like beef, is bad for the environment because of the resources required to produce the meat.
(I'm not going to quit eating meat though.)
Im also glad to have the option to buy organic foods.
fwiw,
Tomatoes
There are No GMO tomatoes. Taste differences are based on what the plants were fertilized with, and whether the fruit was picked green or not.
…
Environmental damage
GMO plants are involved in unintended consequences that create environmental damage in at least four ways
1. The modification to add the Roundup Resistant gene, means the field will be treated with Roundup, which accumulates and persists, in the soil… like most pesticides… This kills the soil… leads to desertification…
2. The decision to use Roundup to kill plants so they dry up for harvest, adds chemicals to the soil. This is for NON GMO Wheat for example… it has Roundup in it, that was used to kill the plant at harvest. We are eating Roundup, but not the GMO… im not sure which is worse… well, actually I am…
3. The modification that adds the gene that is toxic to caterpillars, kills butterflies… and we dont really know all the environmental implications of that.
4. GMO and associated chemicals including both pesticides and fertilizer, allow agribusiness monocropping to remain profitable. Agribusiness is bad for the environment in a number of ways, for example: The soil becomes depleted, and leads to a process called desertification… another unintended consequence of agribusiness is that the chemical fertilizer runoff creates deadzones, both in our waterways, and where fresh water enters the ocean.