GM even safer than conventional food, says environment secretary

What is more important when it comes to a company using controversial methods of producing "food" who has extensive ties with government and little to no regulation because of this.. Evidence of danger(of which there is substantial evidence of supression), or short term incomplete studies on its safety used to justify, and glorify, its use on as many people as possible without looking at all the posibilities? You have to keep in mind the company we are speaking of and it's history in similar claims made about it's products safety.