On balance, the benefits of GMO's outweigh the harms.

=Clarification=Thanks to Liz for instigating! I anticipate a fun debate with her, and perhaps my most challenging yet on DDO. I will begin the debate with brief constructives which will be elaborated as need be upon Pro's rebuttals.Before we begin, I would like to clarify that due to an err whilst creating the debate, I will be arguing for CON and Debatability will be arguing for PRO. Please judge this debate under the pretense that I am CON and Debatability is PRO. Thanks for reading and good luck to Debatability!=Arguments=C1. Environmental impact of genetically modified organisms and longterm repercussionsThe usage of genetically modified organisms has a grander potential to harm ecosystems to such an extent that employing them in the first place could become massively counterintuitive - most notably due to cross-pollination and cross-breeding. If genetically modified crops or organisms were to be widely implemented, they could seriously threaten aspects of biodiversity within preexisting ecosystems. The World Health Organization [1] asserts that out-crossing - a process in which genetically modified genes and aspects of genetically modified organisms (specifically crops) are spread to other organisms in the wild - could result in complete hybridization of ecosystems, entirely eliminating not only the plant in it's original form but all other members of the ecosystem that are not tolerant to toxins found in some genetically modified crops, particularly those produced by Monsanto [2]. Large scale production of GMOs can relatively rapidly force their successors into extinction in this fashion.Besides prompting environmental destruction within ecosystems, GMO susceptibility to out crossing can have economic and societal repercussions. According to the WHO, traces of GMO corn designed for livestock feed can now be found as constituting large portions of the makeup of GMO corn oriented for human consumption. This could upset and subside efforts taken by health organizations to insure proper food and safety practices.In addition, the adverse effects of genetically modified organisms do not solely relate to plant/crop populations - evidence can support that species as differential as the Monarch Butterfly can be adversely effected by the utilization of genetically modified organisms. [3] A 1999 study illustrated that Monarch Caterpillar exposure to "Bt Corn", a Monsanto GMO, caused mortality amongst the species. Even considering that Monarch Butterflies do not feed on corn, inevitable exposure via out-crossing and weather events can cause large fluctuations in regional populations.Straying even further from GM crops, even the introduction of genetically modified salmon has the potential to wreak environmental havoc. According to a study published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, releasing as little as 60 genetically modified salmon into a population of 60,000 could have the potential to wipe out large portions of the unmodified species and drive the population down to a near extinct amount consisting almost solely of modified salmon. [4]All in all, any possible net benefits that an affirming position could suppose would not exist to such an extent that they could outweigh the value of the sanctity of our environment. C2. Health RisksThe existence and development of genetically modified organisms within society has been plagued by an extensive history of concern about possible negative/detrimental effects on Human and Environmental health when consumed. A plethora of studies and academia which pose possible issues concerning the safety of genetically modified foods and organisms remain largely undismayed, whilst some are highly contested. To highlight one of the more undismayed reports, relatively recently, a 2011 Elsevier study [5] found that exposure to glysophate, GLUF, and other pesticides resulted in the presence of extrinsic substances associated with pesticides (that are tied to GMOs) in maternal, fetal, and non-pregnant women's blood to varying degrees. The most notable of the toxins found was the Cry1AB toxin (or Monsanto's Bt formula). Fetuses in particular are highly subject to adverse effects and repercussions on development associated with xenobiotics and foreign substances. Studies suggest that, as a possible result of this, fetuses especially exposed to GMOs are at a higher likelihood of undergoing birth defects. [6].Other studies, most notably the Seralini studies of 2007,09,and 11 found that the consumption of Monsanto GMOs to certain scales caused near-catastrophic damages to the livers, hearts, and kidneys of rats, mostly as a result of dangers associated with hepatorenal toxicity [7]. Certain organizations have even noted deaths of mammals as large as cows after consumption of toxins associated with genetically modified organisms [8]. A variety of other studies and articles on the subject support the theory that generally negative/unusual repercussions can be associated with the regular consumption of genetically modified organisms [9].The limited amounts of medical analysis provided by independent sources within the scientific community - and note the word independent very well - indicate that there are highly plausible negative effects associated with the consumption of GMOs. This downplays any benefits they may have as, being so ambiguous outside the medical knowledge these studies profess, they have the potential to inflict major harm upon consumers and would inherently do more harm than good when consumed - as opposed to regular foods. C3. Genetically Modified Organisms and Biotechnology CompaniesThe vast majority of, if not all, genetically modified organisms can trace their origins back to larger scale biotechnology companies. The most notable is Monsanto, an agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology company that is responsible for the vast majority of commercial modification of crop genes, though others exist. Thus, in this regard, a harm associated with genetically modified organisms is that they are, in feasible society, only capable of being produced by biotechnology companies whose motivations may not be to exploit any so-called "benefits" of genetically modified organisms in a fashion that benefits broader humanity or society.If genetically modified foods are, in some or even most cases, entirely patented [10] and incapable of being controlled by large and diverse markets, then they are in themselves entirely susceptible to control and manipulation to suit the interests of Monsanto - and arguing from utilitarianism, what benefits Monsanto is not what benefits the majority. Monsanto and biotechnological corporations like/associated with them have proven in the past that cooperation with societal needs and interests are less prioritized by them when compared to profit margins. They do this in refusing to label products, indulge in full scientific comprehension of genetically modified organisms, and in using legislative maneuvering to handle concerns about GMOs rather than subscribing to the consensus of the scientific community. To summarize, any benefits GMOs may 'appear' to have could largely be considered irrelevant judging that they cannot be feasibly exploited anyways as a result of a conflict in interest concerning the companies that own them, drastically effecting how much 'weight' these benefits are appointed per the resolution.============C3 concludes my initial constructives. Depending on Liz's contentions, if I do not reserve the right to introduce some new arguments (none as major as the ones provided here), then I would ask she clarifies as much in R2. Just to RE-CLARIFY, I am arguing CON in this debate and Debatability (Liz) is arguing for PRO.Thanks, and on to you, Liz! =Sources=[1] - (http://tinyurl.com...)[2] - (http://tinyurl.com...)[3] - Transgenic pollen harms monarch larvae (Nature, Volume 399, No 6733, Page 214, May 1999)[4] - (http://tinyurl.com...)[5] - (http://tinyurl.com...) [6] - (http://tinyurl.com...)[7] - (http://tinyurl.com...)[8] - (http://tinyurl.com...) [9] - (http://tinyurl.com...)[10] - (http://tinyurl.com...)