without undulating like a snake...
>
> However - The lie exists in the continuing statements that a) GM foods are
safe
> - rather than the true statement that 'we do not know if they are safe but
they
> probably are' -

This falls under the category of opinion and not true statement in the sense
of true knowledge.
Another *true* statement would read rather something  more like, 'We do not
know if they are safe, some may be and some may not be,' with of course the
proviso being safe for what or whom, the profits of the GMers, environments,
human body systems, and maybe a lot more other provisos.
But perhaps the truest statement would just simply have a period where the
first comma is..., thus:   We do not know if they are safe.
We have only hypothetical suppositions and opinions, which may end up being
right or wrong nad certainly no conclusive repeatable experiments on the
hypotheses, as I understand it.  We have only experiments skewed for certain
socioeconomic and political ends.

and of course we are back to the original philosophical question:   what is
truth?

We have that  study that attempts to show that Kepler could not have made
many of the observations that led to his elliptical theory.   Such an
observation seems somewhat relevant to the present question.