[colechristensen]

Very few foods are genetically modified and those modifications have nothing to do with taste or nutrition, but pest and pest control resistance.

Foods have been bred for shelf stability and size which leads to less flavor and nutrition.

[MorrisMinor]

Traditional breeding may have reduced the nutritional content of plants, but GM can be used to produce plants that are nutritious and high yielding.

One study took wild tomatoes and used GM to increase yield:

"Compared with the wild parent, our engineered lines have a threefold increase in fruit size and a tenfold increase in fruit number. Notably, fruit lycopene accumulation is improved by 500% compared with the widely cultivated S. lycopersicum."

https://www.nature.com/articles/nbt.4272

[colechristensen]

Such things are not in the food supply. No doubt it is possible, and there has been research, but there are exactly 0 available GMO tomatoes available to buy as food in the US.

[MorrisMinor]

Perhaps it's just a matter of time.

Here's a good overview of the technology:

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20211207-the-tomatoes-at-...

[colechristensen]

I would be quite fine if it were.

But a certain kind of person (such as the first commenter in this thread I was responding to) believes most of their food if it doesn't have an adjective ("organic" maybe?) is a genetically modified organism, and everything bad about food is attributed to genetic engineering, this is quite false and a result of people who don't know much sharing disinformation with each other.