Actually, it is. They are methods to alter the genome of corn to be different than the wildtype ancestor. Modern methods of genetic engineering are much more refined than older methods, and result in less change to the genome.
The difference between cross breeding to change entire genomes and selective enzymatic gene modification to make specific, controlled changes is equivalent to the difference between using a bulldozer to knock down trees or using a saw to remove only the branches overhanging your driveway. Either way, you clear the driveway.
I don’t give a crap who important and knowledgeable and experienced you are or tout yourself as being; you are not all knowing, and there are many people just as highly educated and experienced in the field as yourself, who disagree with your stand on vaccines as being the wonder magic of all times.
Please, provide an example of a person who is highly educated (PhD level) in a life science, who understands the biology of viruses and bacteria and how the immune system reacts to them, yet who advocates against vaccines. A kook or two notwithstanding, you will not find people in my field who advocate against fighting deadly diseases using the tools at our disposal.
But you, the One Who Knows It All, won’t admit that you are ever wrong.
No, I won't ever "admit" to being wrong when I make sure that everything I post regarding science and health is backed up by voluminous scientific research. Science is an objective discipline; in the hard sciences, the opinion of the scientist is irrelevant to the outcome of the experiment or study.
Adding genes to make corn and other plants immune to Roundup so it can sprayed and not die, adding genes from animals to plants, is just like what people did previously to make food plants stronger or better.
Yes, scientists like you have done so much good for the world.
Appeal to authority is still a fallacy.
You do not have to admit to being wrong, while still still being wrong.
That is 2 fallacies you have already committed. Only 1 single fallacy can cause human damage. If you were that precise, you would not be making these fallacies that can kill or cut life short.
If biologists understood vaccine effectivity and human illness, then biologists would simply take their own advice, and there would be little sick or overweight biologists, Doctors or nurses, compared to the norm. They would be the healthiest group of humans. Biologists would avoid heart disease, cancer and strokes, at the best levels in society.
The PhD micro biologist would not have a heart disease stent while others are healthy.
The biologist, Doctor or nurse know dangerously little about preventing illness, because it is also a science of psychology, economics and areas they understand little about.
The only stakeholder with a real incentive to remain healthy is the patient. The Doctor’s incentive is to sell harmful drugs. The Micro Biologist’s incentive is to create drugs.
Vaccines do not create long term immunity. Conversely, they create drug dependent, weaker descendents over the years, versus using true natural evolution for a healthy lineage.
And the desire for the last word is your third fallacy.