The structure of this case study was very strange. It opens with a fictitious article detailing an incident where a child died from an allergic reaction to genetically modified corn. They next segment includes a fake letter to the editor detailing all the factual errors in the fake article. This entire case study felt pointless because there has to be real GMO cases to choose from. However, they could have just been satirizing the hysteria surrounding the GMO debate. The letter to the editor was the most jarring was the letter to the editor debunking the scientific accuracy they made. What this case meant to do was to give a lead to the mountain of questions. What is strange about this case study is that it doesn’t give that much insight into GMOs, but it does demonstrate the debate surround them well. If that was the intention then that is commendable, but the questions ask tell a different story. Questions such as, “Provide a brief overview of recumbent DNA technology?” Show that the intention was to provide facts in an article with follow question to check your knowledge. In conclusion, The case study provided an interesting look at the GMO debate, but the follow question show a different intention.