Type of Publication: Report
Author(s): GMO Free Florida
URL: https://gmofreeflorida.org/gm-soy-2/
Abstract:
Background:
Genetically modified (GM) food safety is a controversial subject. Some use the narrative reviews Nicolia 2014 and Sanchez 2017 to claim that the consensus in the scientific literature is that all GM foods currently on the market are as safe as their conventional counterparts.
Purpose:
To examine feeding studies using animals comparable to humans fed GM soy with single event GTS 40-3-2, and health parameters, which were reviewed by Nicolia 2014 and Sanchez 2017. Since the claim is that all GM foods currently on the market are as safe as their conventional counterparts, if the consensus in the scientific literature is that even a single GM food on the market is less safe, then this claim must be rejected. We chose GTS 40-3-2 as it is one of the most grown, has the most animal feeding studies according to Sanchez 2017 and is one of the most approved GM foods internationally.
Data Sources and Selection:
Review of all sources purported to be used by Nicolia 2014 and Sanchez 2017 pertaining to relevant animal feeding studies using GM food GTS 40-3-2.
Data Extraction:
Relevant studies were identified which used GTS 40-3-2.
Results:
Sanchez 2017
71.4% of relevant studies reviewed in Sanchez 2017 suggest adverse effects or biomarkers indicative of adverse effects from the GTS 40-3-2 diet.
100% of the medium and long-term studies, of 6 months feeding duration or longer, reviewed in Sanchez 2017 suggest adverse effects or biomarkers indicative of adverse effects from the GTS 40-3-2 diet.
86.2% of the relevant studies that should have been reviewed in Sanchez 2017 suggest adverse effects or biomarkers indicative of adverse effects from the GTS 40-3-2 diet.
Nicolia 2014
90% of relevant studies reviewed by Nicolia et al. suggest adverse effects or biomarkers indicative of adverse effects from the GTS 40-3-2 diet.
100% of the medium and long-term studies, of 6 months feeding duration or longer, reviewed in Nicolia 2014 suggest adverse effects or biomarkers indicative of adverse effects from the GTS 40-3-2 diet.
94.7% of the relevant studies that should have been reviewed in Nicolia 2014 suggest adverse effects or biomarkers indicative of adverse effects from the GTS 40-3-2 diet.
Conclusion:
Based on the results of our systematic review, the claim that all GM foods currently on the market are as safe as their conventional counterparts is not supported by the weight of the scientific evidence. Instead, a clear consensus in the scientific literature regarding the popular GM food GTS 40-3-2, considered to be the most tested GM food, has emerged. Our systematic review of the scientific evidence indicates that in most of the relevant animal feeding studies there were adverse effects or biomarkers indicative of adverse effects reported.
These results are consistent with systematic reviews indicating an overwhelming consensus among health groups and individual health professionals on GM foods. The consensus among these health experts is that GM foods currently on the market cannot presently be considered as safe as their conventional counterparts (GMO Free Florida 2022, GMO Free Florida 2022a). Therefore, we call upon the health community, who are the experts on health, to continue to inform the public of the potential harms from GM foods and to choose non-GMO and organic foods to avoid those potential harms. We urge the governments of the world to impose a moratorium on all GM foods until each GM food has been demonstrated as safe in independent long-term and multigenerational chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity studies using both rodents and non-rodents comparable to humans. We also call upon all who have published papers claiming that there is a consensus that all GM foods on the market are safe to provide corrections, or formally retract their papers if necessary. Our systematic reviews indicate this claim is not supported by the consensus, nor does it appear this claim was ever supported by the consensus.
A precautionary approach should be taken especially since there is now a consensus among health groups and individual health professionals that GM foods currently on the market cannot be considered as safe as their conventional counterparts at this present time and a consensus in the scientific literature that some GM foods currently on the market may be unsafe compared to their conventional counterparts.
