The G.M.O article goes back and forth about people who think genetically modified foods are good or have negative effects. A study reported that G.M.O corn caused tumors in rats, which makes it believable that it could effect humans negatively in the long hall. And then there is comments such as this; “Even when we are taking genes from animals and inserting them into plants or vice-versa, the results are still safe, reduce pesticide use, and dramatically increase crop yields.” On the other hand, theres a petition signed by 354,000 saying g.m.o.s endanger public health and some dedicated protesters; “These chemical companies think they’re going to win,” one woman said. “Hell, no, they’re never going to win here.” In my opinion putting genetically modified substances in plants to make them grow faster is the same as someone putting steroids in their bodies to make them grow faster. It’s good for the moment but the side effects and consequences could prove to be deadly in the future. Something that caught my attention in this article was Margaret’s suspicion of the biotech company, “And her bill, like much anti-G.M.O. action, was inspired by distrust of the seed-producing biotechnology companies, which had backed a state measure to prevent local governments from regulating their activity.” Why would a company thats supposedly making food supply “better” and “safe” be hiding their activities from the government? Pretty sketchy if you ask me. I believe that these unorthodox methods of food production is detrimental to our health and environment.