The impacts of a specific new technology are seen as symptomatic of changes in the structure of agriculture, resulting in a loss of small family farms and the strength that they bring to communities. As I see it, transgenic crosses are not a natural process, and GMOs seem to move more control over agriculture to the multinational corporations. Here is a holistic and critical view of the new technology, and a suggestion that wider issues are important even as we evaluate the potential impacts of single technologies. If the government agencies say that this is safe, I assume that it is. The average consumer in this country is not concerned about food safety, other than reading about some of the more spectacular problems when there is a well-publicized outbreak of food poisoning.
People generally believe and trust the government as well as commercial food companies.
And when multinational corporations come in with cheap food, this leads to loss of culture as well as business for local shops. A much different attitude seems to prevail in Europe about what is safe, what is nutritious, and what is culturally acceptable. Organic food consumption is much higher in several of the northern European countries, compared to the U.S., and there are multiple reasons for this difference, one of which is avoidance of food containing GMOs. As stated by the dean in the first example, our main goal is education. As a public institution, we design programs for the public good-as perceived by each individual instructor or Extension educator.