Source: Genome damage from CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing higher than thought
These results create safety implications for gene therapies using CRISPR/Cas9 in the future as the unexpected damage could lead to dangerous changes in some cells.
Oh my, this is significant! So GMOs are a delicate subject. But GMOs as a whole may not be the evil that many people think of them as being.
In some respects they are safer than classical genetic techniques because in theory you know exactly what you want to change and exactly where. One of the classic examples of breeding for a trait is an issue with celery. After careful classic pollination and seed production trying to breed for insect herbivory resistance the plants were unmarketable as they simply increased production of a phototoxin. This would not have happened with an attempt at a GMO. The major problem I have with GMOs is that 90% of them in plants are produced simply to increase pesticide resistance so that more pesticides can be sprayed on the fields. This is not a good outcome. But the main benefit is the idea of knowing exactly what you want to change and exactly what you have ultimately done. And realize this is about more than creating plant GMOs. This is about changing bacteria and pets and human beings. If this paper is correct then that main benefit is untrue.
Learn about your environment learn about what the scientific community is doing to your world. And don’t believe something just because “science says” any more than you would believe “Simon says” — to go jump in a lake.
The best to you all.