This is why regulation of GMOs needs to be structured in terms of risk/benefit instead of safety alone. I absolutely support genetic modification of major calor

This is why regulation of GMOs needs to be structured in terms of risk/benefit instead of safety alone. I absolutely support genetic modification of major calorie crops, and I think there's a strong case that the environmental risk from such modifications is smaller than the risk of alternative paths (spray more chemical pesticides, clear more land, etc.) to achieve the same total yields. The benefit here is very close to zero, though; one wild-type pothos won't affect indoor air quality in any way known to be significant to human health, and neither will thirty. We've already got escaped transgenic GloFish in Brazilian streams; those haven't caused any significant harm yet, but I'd rather we stopped rolling the dice before something does.