What would it take for me to change my mind?

In a recent conversation about GMOs, the phrase "[I] won't change my mind. I strongly believe . . ." came up.  Well, that's a silly notion . . . to think there is no possibility of ever changing our minds.  Are we God, that we know and understand all?  So as I pondered that thought, I wondered what it would take to convince me that GMOs are bad?  After all, it is unfair for me to hammer on the anti-GMO crowd, when I am as staunchly in my corner as they are in theirs.

So I ask the question to you - what would it take for you to change your mind?  Are you truly open minded about the topic?  I am open minded - below is a detailed description of what it would take to change my mind.  I am willing to believe GMOs are bad, if the following items are addressed.  

I have three issues that need to be addressed.

1.  Not all GMOs are the same.  

To make the general statement, "GMOs are bad for [the bees, the soil, the air, personal health, economy]" is to say "movies are bad" or "wood furniture is bad."  GMOs are a broad category of countless products.  Even if we limited ourselves only to the "food" items (which is where most GMO conversations are centered), there are still thousands of products to consider.  Before I can accept "GMOs (as a category) are bad" I must first believe an overwhelming number of the varieties are bad.  Consider that corn alone has at least 17 varieties.  I bet the real number is closer to 100, but hard data was difficult to find (and really doesn't matter for the purposes of this post).

How would we show any individual variety is bad?  See issue #2.

2.  Prove the existing research is bad.  

Right now, we have 3 areas of research / study and we're missing the 4th.  We have research and opinions claiming GMOs are bad, GMOs are good, and debunking of "GMOs are bad".  But we have no papers specifically tearing into the "GMOs are good" research and showing how methodology is bad or the data is interpreted inappropriately.   If you are going to claim Monsanto products are bad, you need to specifically refute the research put out by Monsanto.  Show me specifically where Monsanto did bad research.  Where is their methodology faulty?  What specific mistakes /errors did they make?

There is lots of hate mongering and name calling against Monsanto (the patent bully, greedy corporate, evil), but these are irrelevant - the only question that matters is the correctness of their research.  You can't address the morality of Monsanto as a company.  I don't care if Monsanto is "good" or "bad"; I am concerned with their research.  Are they doing good research?  Are their findings properly documented and reported?  Are they appropriately interpreted?  Are their results repeatable? 

You can't use anecdotes.  Not a single one.  Not yours, not your neighbor, not a famous person, not an internet post.  Anecdotes are the beginning of science, they lead us to ask questions and seek answers.  But anecdotes are not evidence, and a plurality of anecdotes is not proof.

And you can't complain Monsanto suppresses research.  I call BS on that.  Millions of scientists in the entire world, and many of them with a personal grudge against Monsanto.  Are you really telling me they are afraid to publish their research?  They're afraid to perform the research?  There's no renegades who worked there that can expose the faulty research?  That's just crap.

If you get past all of this . . . you have to publish it in Nature or Science.  Trust me, if you can produce this research, they will have a "hold the presses" moment and make you the cover story the next day.  No self publishing on your blog.  No producing a video of you in a lab coat.  No press release to CNN.  Just boring, plain, publish it where it can be reviewed and scrutinized by actual scientists.  Good Morning America sharing science opinions is about as useful as me sharing muscle car reviews.  Why did I pick those two?  They are the premier publications for general science.  And they would kill for an expose on that.

3.  Replace the GMOs with alternative solutions to the problems currently being addressed GMOs

Show how you can solve the problems that GMOs are solving, namely, increasing yields, lowering herbicide and pesticide use, protect the rain forest, use less fresh water, longer shelf life, easier to transport, extend the season of fresh foods, etc.

Related articles - GMOs and bees, GMO wheat can help feed the world, the original GMO - tomato (didn't know the tomato had such a noble history), One of my personal favorite debunk articles (not about GMOs) about the fork over knives movie,