Perfectly fine and advantageous as they will be more disease resistant, hence less pesticides will be used and also nutrient content can be made much higher. Shelf life can also be increased and the growing season can be extended as well as larger crop yield.
This is factually wrong. There is an apparent, recognized problem with GMO crops. GMO of soy and corn are specifically modified to be resistant to pesticides so that
more pesticides can be used, and more must be used because the weeds also become stronger and more resistant by natural selection. They have even had to approve variants of agent orange again for food crops. They are running out of herbicides.
I get all the projected benefits they were talking about, but this is the reality.
I also don't think it's a good idea to spread in the wild seeds that are not viable more than one generation, have DNA delivering viruses in them, or produce their own pesticide. If they start replacing natural seeds in nature it can lead to imbalances at the least and then there is no way back. It's pretty much unknown. That seed vault in Norway is for this reason, even Monsanto would admit that.
There are at least slight negative health effects in all the animal studies. I don't know how real the studies are that claim cancer, but for some reason internal organs of farm animals fed GMO crops are damaged to some extent.
Personally I have started to avoid GMO.