I have less than a minute left.
A two-year review recently completed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine examined 900 studies. It found “...no differences that would implicate a higher risk to human health from eating GE foods than from eating non-GE counterparts” and “...little evidence to connect GE crops and their associated technologies with adverse agronomic or environmental problems.”
That's a noted organization commissioning a study that looked at 900 studies. When we examine this issue, we have to do so from the basis of what the evidence says. What do you say when we have a study that seems so robust?