i don't understand how anyone in the first place could oppese GMOs broadly. To say that genetic modification itself is a risk factor for anything is ridiculous. GMOs are organisms with new genes thrown in, which happens all the time in nature. The only difference between a natural organism and a GMO is that humans had a hand in the design of GMOs. You can, however, oppose specific modifications. If Monsanto puts out some kind of nitrogen fixing corn and a side effect of that nitrogen-fixing gene is like alzheimer's or something, then you can say, "This specific variant of corn is bad, let's not eat it." You can't say, "This corn was genetically modified, therefore all GMOs cause alzheimer's."
There are modifications that for profit businesses will make even if it's not in the best interest of the consumer/earth etc. There are also, modifications that could benefit both the consumer and the earth that anti gmo people will cease to believe or acknowledge."If Monsanto puts out some kind of nitrogen fixing corn and a side effect of that nitrogen-fixing gene is like alzheimer's or something, then you can say, "This specific variant of corn is bad, let's not eat it." You can't say, "This corn was genetically modified, therefore all GMOs cause alzheimer's."
I think this is a rational way to look at it and that there are irrational people on both sides of this issue and of course, they tend to have the loudest voices.