> Ah, then society's trust in science should be warned to watch out.

Perhaps you've noticed an alarming rise in society's distrust in science, perhaps partly exacerbated by an increase in poorly peer-reviewed publications.

No, that's mostly a result of global warming denialism paid for by fossil fuel companies, vaccine denialism pushed by chancers like Andrew Wakefield, and the completely awful state of media pop-science.

Except that - if you've ever argued with a conspiracy theorist online, you will know their propensity for posting links to really bad papers as "proof".

You forgot anti-GMO horror stories paid by agriculture and "organic food" companies.

I'm not sure on this one; I suspect there's a lot of "media management" going on by Monsanto, as well as a lot of activists who are under-informed on the technology. Personally I thought that Big Ag was in favour of GMO and that organic food wasn't big enough to fund a disinformation campaign.

If a local producer is getting outpriced by a foreign company with more resources, turning it into "stop importing harmful GMOs" issue is rather convenient.

GMO is not inherently unsafe, nor is it inherently safe. Plants can be engineered to produce additional nutrients and better withstand drought, but they can also be engineered with insecticidal proteins that may be harmful to humans. This is perfectly analogous to pharmaceuticals. If someone said "ban all pharmaceuticals", we'd agree that they're crazy, but the correct response is not "pharmaceuticals are perfectly safe". Some pharmaceuticals are perfectly safe. Some are deadly poisons. GMOs need to go through an evaluation process before being approved for the open market.