> Again mutagenesis I would consider "manipulating DNA directly using technology" its just using a less targeted and more random approach. Right, I would put m

> Again mutagenesis I would consider "manipulating DNA directly using technology" its just using a less targeted and more random approach. Right, I would put mutagenesis in my second category of "modern GMO". (Edit: I interpreted your use of mutagenesis as the controlled use, as in the original topic of this post. Maybe that's not what you meant?) > Which process is more likely to produce harmful side effects? Is there data to warrant engineered organisms are more likely or is it just unwarranted fear? That's essentially what my question was, for traditional artificial selection (selective breeding) versus genetic engineering. I wasn't making a point one way or another; it was a genuine question. The point about random mutations occurring naturally is fair. Perhaps part of what scares people is simply the speed of the process, combined with not really knowing or understanding what technology is being used in the labs.