GMO Foods - Rotunda Project

   I took to looking at the rotunda project on GMOs and their effects on human health. While this study took a neutral standpoint in stating both the purported positive and negative aspects of genetically modifying organisms, I wanted to do my own research.
   I had heard that very little proof had come to light that GMOs negatively effect the health of consumers, but proof that they were positive didn't exist either. What I found was instead quite different:
   The project said that, in defense of the argument that they are detrimental to one's health, that GMOs could cause allergic reactions. I read that, over the past 15 years, studies have been done to prove this untrue and that any allergens associated with genetically modified foods come from the foods themselves; i.e., if I have a peanut allergy, I am just as likely to have a reaction to a GMO peanut as I am to a non-GMO peanut. And the same goes for if I didn't have an allergy; the GMO peanut wouldn't induce a reaction either. It just comes from the food.
   One of the main arguments of those against genetically modified foods is that the studies and tests on them are conducted by the companies responsible for their sale, which produces bias. This may be true, but evidence further pointed elsewhere:
    It was stated in the project that microscopic bacteria growing on GMO foods may cause decreased antibiotic efficiency. The bacteria would transfer DNA that caused antibiotic resistance into bacteria in one's own body, which would prevent such medications from treating infection. As it turns out, the chance of this occurring is as microscopic as the bacteria themselves, as we consume such organisms whenever we eat fruits and vegetables, yet this does not occur.
   However, I did find two very compelling arguments against GMOs:
   Firstly, the fact that, since their introduction, the increased use of herbicides has produced "super-weeds." While the GMO plants can survive the poisoning, weeds cannot, forcing natural selection. Weeds that have a certain resistance to the herbicide reproduce, requiring a stronger deterrent to be used. Presently, one that has been utilized as a result is 4,2-D. This is a major ingredient in agent orange, the chemical responsible for causing various illnesses and medical conditions in our Vietnam veterans.
   Secondly, as GMO seeds are planted just like regular ones, they have a tendency to be swept up by the wind onto the farms of cultivators who do not grow GMO plants. If the company producing them finds their seeds on another farmer's field, they are free to sue - and they have. As a result, smaller farms are getting eaten up by larger ones (such as those run by Monsanto) and big corporations are monopolizing agriculture.
  I believe that, in this argument, there are some very vague points in regards to the actual harm that GMO plants themselves can cause. However, their growth has definitely caused some issues that need to be ironed out, and I believe anyone weighing in on this debate needs to view those more carefully than those shrouded in superstition.