# data[].attributes.body
Title: "GMOs Are Nothing to Fear"
Argument:  Scientific research has not detected any significant hazards directly connected with GMOs.
"There has never been a single credible scientific study showing GMOs to have harmful effects on humans, animals or our environment."
Reliability: I think it is reliable because it states facts and who they came from. There is no opinions in the article.

# data[].attributes.body
Title: "Are GMO's Really That Harmful?
GMO's represent scientific advances and do not pose any threats.
"It's simply the use of the modern technology available and our absolutely fabulous increase in knowledge over the past 40 years to improve in many different ways."
Scientists say that GMO crops do not pose a health threat and can help feed undeveloped countries.
Reliability: I think it is reliable because it states facts and it comes from organizations or scientists.

# data[].attributes.body
Article: Five Good Reasons To Support GMO's
Quote: "On average, GM technology adoption has reduced chemical pesticide use by 37%, increased crop yields by 22%, and increased farmer profits by 68%."
Validity: I think that this article is a valid source because all the statements were backed up by studies.

# data[].attributes.body
Title: The Argument in Favor of GMOs.
"For regions of the planet where there was little rainfall, plants could be made drought resistant. Vitamins could be introduced, making genetically modified produce more nutritious. Crops would be made resilient to pests and could grow in spite of them"
The website is reliable because it just gave facts and it stated quotes from different people supporting GMOs, " Dr. Alan McHughen warned that the earth would not be able to feed the ever-growing billions of people who inhabit it".

# data[].attributes.body
From : The Science of GMOs
"Before GMOs, many common medicines had to be extracted from blood donors, animal parts, or even cadavers. These medicines had a number of problems including the risk of transmission of diseases, inconsistent quality and unreliable supply. GMO medicines are more consistent and don’t carry the same contamination risk."
The article argues in favor of GMOs in terms of medicinal advancement. The validity of the article seems to be able to be trusted; it's provided by a university, and they make points for and against GMOs

# data[].attributes.body
GMO facts// The Non-GMO project
there are 300 regions around the world that 100% ban the production of gmos.
I think this website is reliable because it has backed up facts.

# data[].attributes.body
"With an ever increasing global population, massive 3rd world hunger, and with an estimation that a child dies for every two seconds world wide from starvation, this technology can be used to benefit farmers and worldwide societies. " Tis information was studied by students at the University of California Santa Cruz.
https://classes.soe.ucsc.edu/cmpe080e/Spring05/projects/gmo/benefits.htm

# data[].attributes.body
The safety of GMO´s has not been based off sound science. I think this website it reliable because all it states is facts and no opinions.

# data[].attributes.body
Article: "Pros & Cons of GMO Foods"

"GMO foods can present significant allergy risks to people, according to Brown University. Genetic modification often mixes or adds proteins that weren't indigenous to the original plant or animal, causing new allergic reactions in the human body. In some cases, proteins from an organism that you're allergic to may be added to an organism that you weren't originally allergic to, prompting the same allergic reaction experienced from the first organism."

I believe that this article is valid because it lists facts about GMO experiments that took place in various universities.

# data[].attributes.body
the world will need to produce at least 50% more food by 2050 to feed its projected population of 9 billion. This website is valid because its from Columbia university.

# data[].attributes.body
Title: "10 Reasons to Avoid GMOs"
Argument:  There is a direct connection between GMOs and the destruction of an environment. "For example, GM crops are eliminating habitat for monarch butterflies, whose populations are down 50% in the US. Roundup herbicide has been shown to cause birth defects in amphibians, embryonic deaths and endocrine disruptions, and organ damage in animals even at very low doses."
Valid: The website URL ends in .org showing that it is reliably because it is being used for a non-profit organization.

# data[].attributes.body
fewer inputs like water, pesticides, needed to grow more food on less land

# data[].attributes.body
Golden Rice was developed to prevent Vitamin-A deficiency in the children of developing countries.
I think this article is reliable because it talks about the necessity of GMO products and how it could be beneficial for people.

# data[].attributes.body
Title: "GMO Dangers: Facts You need to know."
Quote: "These GMOs, which include maize, cotton and soybeans, are called Bt plants. Bt plants get their name because they incorporate a trans-gene that makes a protein-based toxin (sometimes called the Cry toxin) from the bacterium bacillus thuringiensis. Many Bt crops are stacked, meaning they contain a multiplicity of these Cry toxins. Their makers believe each of these Bt toxins is insect-specific and safe. However, there are multiple reasons to doubt both safety and specificity. One concern is that Bacillus thuringiensis is all but indistinguishable from the well known anthrax bacterium (Bacillus anthracis)."
Validity: I do not think this is very valid because the write is very opinionated towards his reasoning.

# data[].attributes.body
"GM food products are among the most tested products in history. A meta-study of more than 1,700 peer-reviewed studies found no evidence that GMO crops produce adverse affects in humans or livestock."
This source is not valid because it is a blog and very opinionated.

# data[].attributes.body
Title: "10 reasons to avoid GMOs"
"The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for example, doesn’t require a single safety study, does not mandate labeling of GMOs, and allows companies to put their GM foods onto the market without even notifying the agency."
This website and argument is valid because there arguments are backed up ,and the also are using facts over opinions.
http://responsibletechnology.org/10-reasons-to-avoid-gmos/

# data[].attributes.body
"GMOs Are Nothing to Fear". This article explains that "In fact, there has never been a single credible scientific study showing GMOs to have harmful effects on humans, animals or our environment". This site is credible because it is backed by credible scientists and researchers.

# data[].attributes.body
Article: 10 Reasons To Avoid GMO's
Quote: "The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) urges doctors to prescribe non-GMO diets for all patients. They cite animal studies showing organ damage, gastrointestinal and immune system disorders, accelerated aging, and infertility. Human studies show how genetically modified (GM) food can leave material behind inside us, possibly causing long-term problems."
Validity: I think that this article is also valid because the website is to inform readers about GMO's and has "edu" in the website url. Also, each statement that was made was backed up by statistics or proof.

# data[].attributes.body
Title: "Are There Possible Health Risks of GMO Foods?"

Argument: "The process of genetic modification (literally making changes to the plant's DNA) itself can create or increase allergens, toxins, and anti-nutrients"
Validity: It is in the middle. It has scientific research to back up what is said, but admits to it not being enough evidence.

# data[].attributes.body
"The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) urges doctors to prescribe non-GMO diets for all patients. They cite animal studies showing organ damage, gastrointestinal and immune system disorders, accelerated aging, and infertility."
This source is valid because it includes many different studies done by medical associations.

# data[].attributes.body
Numerous health problems increased after GMOs were introduced in 1996. The percentage of Americans with three or more chronic illnesses jumped from 7% to 13% in just 9 years; food allergies skyrocketed, and disorders such as autism, reproductive disorders, digestive problems, and others are on the rise.
I think this article is reliable because it lists statistics instead of opinions of the damage that GMO cause.

# data[].attributes.body
Article=https://www.nongmoproject.org/gmo-facts/
The main arguments against GMO's are that they could potentially cause health problems, environmental damage, and could violate consumers and farmers rights.
I think that this article is fairly unreliable because it is very opinionated  (the title is literally Non-GMO project) and only listed facts against GMOs, but they also have evidence to back up their arguments, with cited sources. This article would be good to see one side of the picture.

# data[].attributes.body
GMOanswers//
modifying a organism allows farmers to take desirable traits and produce  more organisms with them.
I think this website is reliable because it doesn't seem opinion based.

# data[].attributes.body
Title: In Support of GMO Crops
Argument: There are no harmful effects from eating GM crops.
Quote: "There is not a single documented case anywhere in the world demonstrating any illness, allergy, or adverse effect due to the fact that any plant is genetically engineered."
I think that this article may possibly be reliable however this article was written in 2014 and much more research was done between the time that the article was written and now. It probably was reliable for the time that it was written in but may not be applicable now.

# data[].attributes.body
"GM foods can create an essential sustainable way to feed the world."
I do not think that this is a very reliable source because the website looks like it was made for a school project.

# data[].attributes.body
Article- GMO dangers: Facts you need to know
by: Jonathan R. Latham
"I now believe, as a much more experienced scientist, that GMO crops still run far ahead of our understanding of their risks."
Argument: GMOs often contain insecticides which contain dangerous toxins. Also, GMOs are often resistant to herbicides giving farmers free will to spary herbicides on the crops. However, herbicides have been found in the plants which is very dangerous to consume.
Reliability: I do not think the article is reliable because it contains many opinions from the author. He gives information based on what he believes instead of using actual facts.

# data[].attributes.body
"inserting a gene into another organism’s DNA activates non-targeted (and sometimes toxic) genes; lowers the plant’s nutrient content (since the plant’s energy is consumed with producing unnecessary proteins activated by the insertion)." This is valid since the source was scientifically proven by the International of BIological Sciences
https://gmo-awareness.com/all-about-gmos/gmo-risks/

# data[].attributes.body
"The health consequences of eating genetically modified organisms are largely unknown. Genetically engineered foods have not been shown to be safe to eat and may have unpredictable consequences.This is backed by scientists and the wbesite is reliable because of itś other article that have been prove.

# data[].attributes.body
"They increase 'super weeds' and therefore increase pesticide use and toxicity, and do great economic harm to farmers and the food system."
I think that this is a somewhat reliable source because it is form a major healthy food company but it could be biased because they are probably trying to get you to buy their food.

# data[].attributes.body
Article: "Pros & Cons of GMO Foods"

"The Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations reports that some GMO foods have been engineered to be more nutritious in terms of mineral or vitamin content. Not only does this help you get the nutrients you need, it can also play a significant role in battling malnutrition in the developing world. The United Nations advises that vitamin A-enhanced rice is helping to reduce global vitamin A deficiencies."

I believe that this article is valid because the information found in it was taken from the studies at various universities.

# data[].attributes.body
"A growing body of evidence connects GMOs with health problems, environmental damage, and violation of farmers’ and consumers’ rights"
-This article is valid because throughout, it states statistics from different parts of the world that back up the argument that GMOs are harmful to the environment, "More than 80% of all genetically modified crops grown worldwide have been engineered for herbicide tolerance".

# data[].attributes.body
Article=https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/genetically-modified-organisms-gmos-transgenic-crops-and-732
This article was fairly neutral, but had many facts supporting GMOs. The main arguments that the  Article listed were that the technology was still being developed but is constantly becoming safer, new studies are being done, laws are being put in place to regulate GMOs, and that GMOs could be used to create more food.
This article was pretty reliable; it listed all of its sources, it hard arguments both for and against GMOs (mainly for) and it had evidence to support the arguments made.

# data[].attributes.body
title: GM crops the argument pros and cons
"allow farmers to dramatically reduce their use of spray insecticides. Next-generation seeds may allow farmers to maintain high yields while using less water and chemical fertilizer."
I think this website is valid because it also uses facts , but takes an argument and proves it wrong. By using fact to show how GMO products ae helpful to people, countries , and agriculture.
http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/gmos_india/pro_con.html

# data[].attributes.body
Title: "GMOs Are Safe to Eat"
Argument: "When examining the potential for adverse effects on animal and human health, the committee examined acute and chronic animal toxicity tests, long-term data on health of livestock fed GMOs and human epidemiological data. The committee found “no differences” in health risks when comparing GMO foods with non-GMO foods."
Valid: This article is valid because it it has reasonable statistics about GMOs and if they are good for people.

# data[].attributes.body
GMOS are showed to cause Organ Damage, Gastronialtestinal and Immune system disorder

# data[].attributes.body
Title: reasons to Avoid GMOs
After 1996 Scientists and Healthcare providers has found that Americans with chronic illnesses had jumped from 7% to 3% in a total of 9 years,
"The FDA does not require a single safety study, does not mandate labeling of GMOs, and allows companies to put their GM foods onto the market without even notifying the agency."
Reliability: I think this article is reliable because it offers percentages and numbers from real associations that are trustworthy.

# data[].attributes.body
GMO's contaminate the whole field forever, no changing it
http://responsibletechnology.org/10-reasons-to-avoid-gmos/

# data[].attributes.body
Article: GMO Facts (https://www.nongmoproject.org/gmo-facts/)
Quote: "In March 2015, the World Health Organization determined that the herbicide glyphosate (the key ingredient in Roundup®) is “probably carcinogenic to humans.”"
Validity: This article and website is valid because it is the website of "the non gmo butterfly" that we see on food labels. There are many facts and statistics included.

# data[].attributes.body
Title: 10 Reasons to Avoid GMOs
Argument: GMOs harm the environment
Quote: "GM crops and their associated herbicides can harm birds, insects, amphibians, marine ecosystems, and soil organisms. They reduce bio-diversity, pollute water resources, and are unsustainable."
I think that this source is reliable to an extent since it does have some facts to it however it the site it's from probably isn't the best since it's found by someone who is a consumer advocate and not someone who actually has studied about the topic themselves.

# data[].attributes.body
From GMOs - What eaters need to know:
"The sheer prevalence of GMOs in major field crops threatens the genetic diversity of our food supply. New challenges like climate change create an urgency to rebuild biodiversity. Farmers need as many tools as possible to do this – right down to the genetic code. Unfortunately, extreme consolidation in the seed sector has eroded traditional public seed and breed development. At a time when farmers need more options, not fewer, these programs need to be bolstered."
This article argues that GMOs are current decreasing genetic diversity. I would be wary of  it's validity, the article mostly points out the drawbacks of genetically modified foods.

# data[].attributes.body
Article: Genetically Engineered Crops Are Safe and Possibly Good for Climate Change
by: Niina Heikkinen
"In a sweeping 400-page report, the country’s top scientific group found there was not evidence to support claims that genetically modified organisms are dangerous for either the environment or human health.
Argument: There is no evidence to support claims that GMOs are dangerous for the environment or for human health. Also, GMOs are necessary for meeting nutritional demands of the world's growing population
Reliability: I think the article is reliable because it states facts that came from The National Academy of Sciences and also does not contain any opinions. The article contains direct facts from the Academy's research.

# data[].attributes.body
Title: "Five Good Reasons To Support GMOs"
Quote: "In the United States, GM food products must be rigorously tested before they can be sold—far more so than conventionally bred crops. The testing process can take 7-10 years, and must include evaluations of potential risks to humans and livestock as well as potential risks to wildlife and the environment."
Validity: This is a valid source because for all of the reasons the writer gave they backed it up with more information.

# data[].attributes.body
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for example, doesn’t require a single safety study, does not mandate labeling of GMOs, and allows companies to put their GM foods onto the market without even notifying the agency.

# data[].attributes.body
“On average, GM technology adoption has reduced chemical pesticide use by 37%, increased crop yields by 22%, and increased farmer profits by 68%.”

# data[].attributes.body
Title: ¨GMO Facts: 10 Common GMO Claims Debunked

This article talks about how GM crops benefit people contradictory to what people think/say for example it talks about how GM crops can be modified for multiple climates because of climate change. Another benefit is that it may be possible that some GM crops can activate a protein that protects from certain diseases.

# data[].attributes.headline
GMO Facts: 10 Common GMO Claims Debunked

# data[].attributes.subject
GMO Facts: 10 Common GMO Claims Debunked

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about how GM crops benefit people contradictory to what people think/say for example it talks about how GM crops can be modified for multiple climates because of climate change. Another benefit is that it may be possible that some GM crops can "activate a protein that protects from certain diseases"

# data[].attributes.body
Title: GMO Education

This article talks about the bad things about GMO's and the reason behind some GMO products. For example, the article talks about how most crops have a trait that allows them to  tolerate pesticides and other things that can harm the plant and states that there is no health benefit to this but instead economic benefit. The article also talks about how some GMO's have been linked  to "toxic and allergic reactions" for some animals and even "destroy organs" in others