I think when it becomes chronic, it's a lot harder, my mother and sister have had chronic back pains mostly all their life, I heeded that as a warning already as a teen that I was probably at high risk for the same, and have tried to exercise regularly and to not eat too unhealthy. I've always used multi vitamin and mineral supplements, despite the statistics are not too good for that, and about 10 years ago I started taking fish oil in triple dose. Maybe vitamin D was just the missing piece for me, and I was lucky to find out before it was too late. My story is of course anecdotal, but it is also perfectly in line with some of the research that has been done on vitamin D for the past 10-15 years. The reason I mention fish oil is that both my mother and sister have both dieted heavily towards avoiding meat and fat, and I suspect that to have been actively harmful. Essential fatty acids are now known to be crucial for our health, particularly for brain and nerves, and they are both diagnosed with MS now.

I had regular back pains already from my early 20's and for 20 years, I come from a family with a lot of discos prolapses, (if that's the name for it in English), My mother has 4, my sister got her first in her 20's, and my brother got on in his early 30's. I exercised a lot for many years, and I am not diagnosed with it, but would regularly get sudden sharp pains from even minor movements, that would last for days and sometimes several weeks. It all magically vanished about 6 or 7 years ago, when I began to take vitamin D, after I was tested seriously deficient. I read up on vitamin D, and learned that many researchers recommend more than the official numbers, I took what is probably considered the maximum dose considered safe dose of 10000 ie daily for ½ a year, and was tested again, and was at max of what they could meassure, so I reduced to 5000 ie daily, I haven't had a problem with my back since.

I'm all for science and research and generally improving our knowledge and understanding, I'm also all for applying this in new technologies and methods including the use of genetics.

However I do have a problem with GMOs for several reasons. A major problem IMO is that organisms and even genes can be patented and copyrighted. That's is not a sensible concept, you can't copyright breeding dogs with for instance a red tip on their tale, but if you locate the gene for it, you can seemingly patent that. Of course genetics makes it possible to take that gene from somewhere else if dogs don't have it in their gene pool, but basically what genetics are doing is copy/paste coding and should not be protected as IP, just like we shouldn't have software patents.

My other problem is that GMOs often are made for resistance to pesticides, and while that is great to ensure the harvest, the use of more and stronger pesticides is exactly what we shouldn't do, some pesticides are pretty harmless to humans, but those are not the ones GMOs are used to make crops tolerant against.

The third problem is that even if GMOs theoretically could actually be safer than traditional selection, because modifying specific genes theoretically makes it possible to have more accurate knowledge of the change it introduces, I'm not convinced either by regulation or that there is sufficient and qualified oversight or structure to safeguard against blunders that simply wouldn't be possible with normal breeding. Most likely something akin to letting rabbits lose in Australia. Less likely something akin to gut bacteria in ants, that alter the ants behavior so it is more likely to get eaten by ant predators.