2. A study by the CDC estimates that 80% of Americans have glyphosate in their urine. Glyphosate is an antibiotic proven to be disrupting to gut bacteria. Crops are being genetically engineered to allow for more and more glyphosate exposure because the weeds are growing increasingly resistant to it, requiring even more glyphosate - which in turn runs off into our water supply. It's a positive feedback loop as nature abhors monoculture (less diversity = less evolutionary resiliency), and seeks to restore balance and diversity with pests, weeds, viruses, etc. Monocrop agriculture is fundamentally unsustainable
Even if the modification is a simple addition between adjacent start and stop codons, that kind of modification could alter meta encodings that control other aspects of cell regulation, including (potentially) gene expression -- which would cause proteins that are coded for but that normally aren't present to become present in crops. Even one newly expressed protein (that is normally not ever expressed) could trigger immune response.
Normally, parallel evolution of people and crops allows humans enough time to adapt to natural mutations. Note selective breeding doesn't increase the underlying mutation rate - that's the number that I'm concerned we've manipulated beyond acceptable bounds.
none of this really seems to fit with a GMO hypothesis.
(are you a biologist? this stuff is pretty obvious to biologists)
The goal in this case was to improve soybean amino acid content (soybean is a major world crop, with Brazil being one of the top suppliers). Pioneer- one of the major seed companies- created a transgenic (moving a whole gene from one organism to another) soybean with a gene from Brazil nuts. That gene turned out to be the one that produces the protein in Brazil nuts which causes an allergic reaction and the soybeans actually seem to cause a reaction in people who consume them (I'm glossing over a bunch of technical details in the paper).
It's not hard to image, with an existence proof like this, that there are many ways that GM crops could increase the risk to consumers.
Any biologist I've trained with who understands transgenics and immune response would immediately note that this was a fairly obvious potential risk/outcome provided the source gene's properties had been identified first.