This publication seems to be relying on the reader to have a preconceived negative bias on GMOs in order to establish some of their arguments. I understand why

This publication seems to be relying on the reader to have a preconceived negative bias on GMOs in order to establish some of their arguments. I understand why a casual reader who's been led to believe that GMOs are malicious or toxic would find this disturbing, but knowing that GMOs are basically how we are able to consume most if not all modern food safely, it's immediately sensationalist to me. I don't know about the other two topics they address, but I kind of question the motive altogether.