The expression "Genetically Modified Organisms" was coined to indicate a group of agricultural products (mostly crops and vegetables), modified through direct DNA recombination in order to obtain useful phenotypic traits or to inhibit undesirable characteristics. But the border between rDNA ("GMO") and other biotech methods is blurred. Moreover, the ill-assorted group is frequently charged with having peculiar, negative characteristics: many activists, part of the public and a few social science scholars think that "GMOs" are all dubious, even inherently dangerous. However, theoretical justifications of this alleged problematic nature which is supposed to be necessarily linked to the "splicing" of DNA, only when applied to agricultural products, are missing: the only text which tries to go in depth on the subject, an article by biologist Barry Commoner, takes aim at the wrong target, misunderstanding the Central Dogma. "GMO" is a term that has no clear reference, let alone in a detrimental sense. The only attempt to give it epistemological dignity fails.

中文翻译：

---

中央教条“ GMO”和认识论缺陷。

创造“基因修饰生物”这一表述是为了表示一组农产品（主要是农作物和蔬菜），它们通过直接的DNA重组进行修饰以获得有用的表型性状或抑制不良特性。但是，rDNA（“ GMO”）和其他生物技术方法之间的界限却模糊了。此外，分类不良的群体经常被指控具有特殊的消极特征：许多活动家，公众的一部分以及一些社会科学学者认为“ GMO”都是可疑的，甚至是内在的危险。但是，仅当应用于农产品时，这种所谓的有问题性质的理论依据才被认为必定与DNA的“拼接”有关，但理论上的缺失：生物学家Barry Commoner撰写的一篇文章，试图深入探讨该主题的唯一文本，瞄准了错误的目标，误解了中央教条。“ GMO”是一个没有明确参考的术语，更不用说有害了。赋予认识论尊严的唯一尝试失败了。