The dangers of genetically modified foods
The topic of GMOs have been a very controversial one since its introduction in the USA in 1994
A little over a year ago, GMO (genetically modified organisms) or GE (genetically engineered) foods were approved to be grown in Nigeria and the issue continues to generate debate in many quarters. For those that don’t know what GMO means, these are foods that have been genetically modified meaning that the genetic material of the food has been altered from its naturally occurring state. In other words, genes from other sources have been introduced into these foods and this is done for various reasons.
The topic of GMOs have been a very controversial one since its introduction in the USA in 1994 and now that it is approved in Nigeria, it is time to be more aware of what it is and how it may affect us. There have been several groups opposing it and several debates on the safety of GMO foods.
The bio-technology companies that are responsible for manufacturing these genetically engineered foods claim that it will help with increased supply of food which will help eradicate hunger, especially in countries such as Nigeria. That sounds all lovely and good, but still, I personally am highly concerned about the health implications these GMO foods have on our health, and you should be too.
Currently, GMO foods comprise about 55%-70% of the processed foods in the supermarkets. Most of the imported food items we buy from our supermarkets here in Nigeria are genetically modified. Other countries such as England, Italy, Germany, Russia, Japan, New Zealand just to name a few are against the introduction of GMO foods into their country. Why then should we as Nigerians be exposed to these GMO foods? It’s time to pay more attention to what you put inside of your body.
Ms. Gidado, an assistant director with the National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA) said that no research had proven that GMO foods had any adverse effects on human health and the environment. This may be true but long term effects are still scarce and hardly documented probably because not many people I know would offer themselves up to be used as Guinea pigs and be fed with these GMO foods that have been termed carcinogenic and thus harmful. However, various studies have been done on animals and the health implications of GM foods on these animals are not pleasant at all. These health risks include infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, problematic insulin regulation, stomach problems, reduction in digestive enzymes, liver toxicity, allergic reactions, antibiotic resistance, cancer etc. Let me elaborate on a few of these health issues.
Infertility: Studies done on animals showed that more than half of the babies of GM-fed mother rats died within 3 weeks. Also, the longer the mice were fed GM foods, the less babies they had and the smaller the babies were. Also, GM fed rats had uterus and ovary changes, and by the 3rd generation, they were unable to have babies. In addition, about 2 dozen US farms reported that GE-fed pigs or cows developed sterility and could not reproduce. All these suggests infertility or reduced fertility and also a high risk of birth defects. And we wonder why infertility rates are increasing daily in humans.
Cancer: In March 2015, World Health Organization (WHO) classified Glycophosphate as carcinogenic. Glycophosphate is a toxin that is greatly used in GMO foods and has been linked to many illnesses such as Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s, Autism. It has also been known to be linked to breast cancer and prostate cancer. Also IGF (Insulin Growth Factor) is increased in dairy products from cows fed with GE foods. Recent studies show that IGF-1 is an important factor in the growth of breast, prostate, colon cancers. Once again, we wonder why the incidence of cancer is increasing.
Liver toxicity: The liver is one of the important organs in the human body and is responsible for detoxification. Rats that were given GM potatoes showed damaged livers. When these rats were switched to non-GM foods, their liver over time went back to normal. I think it is safe to conclude that GM foods play a part in damaging the liver.
Antibiotic resistance: GE foods have the ability to make certain bacteria to be resistant to antibiotics which will ultimately result in the increase and spread of infections. For example, GE maize plant from Novartis includes an ampicillin resistant gene and if this gene moves from the corn into bacteria, it will make ampicillin an ineffective drug in fighting bacterial infections.
The increase of cancer in humans, strange illnesses and infertility is alarming and everyone keeps wondering why. Perhaps we don’t have to look too far to find a probable cause, we only have to take another look at what types of foods we are putting into our bodies.
The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) has warned that GMO foods are inherently unsafe and have asked all doctors to advise their patients to avoid GM foods.
What do we need to do to protect ourselves? Firstly, we all have to be extra vigilant about the foods you are buying. Most GMO foods are not labelled “GMO” so you have to make sure items you buy are 100% organic. You can also spread awareness about this GMO foods by discussing it with your family and friends. Also, the schools should be aware of what kinds of snacks they are feeding our children.
Better yet, parents are advised to make the children’s snacks from home. Also, since the government has approved these GM foods in Nigeria, the government should also encourage labeling of these GM foods and allow the general public to make the choice of whether to buy it or not.
In conclusion, whenever we alter a food’s original DNA by inserting foreign genes, it is always a gamble. You can’t predict all its consequences. Even though these companies claim that these foods have some advantages, the associated health risks that come with the foods make them harmful and dangerous, especially with long term exposure. In addition, I don’t think Nigeria is well equipped to effectively monitor and manage the health implications that come with long term consumption of genetically modified foods.
Disclaimer: The medical information provided on here by Dr. Nini Iyizoba is provided as an information resource only. This information does not create any patient-physician relationship and should not be used as a substitute for professional diagnosis and treatment.
Related
Latest
Get the latest news delivered straight to your inbox every day of the week. Stay informed with the Guardian’s leading coverage of Nigerian and world news, business, technology and sports.
149 Comments
That strategy of skipping over all the most predominant and highly cited scientific institutions in the world, to get a statement to support your view from an group with little impact, sums up this article pretty well.
So an organization that advocates homeopathy (water) to treat real illnesses should not be trusted on agriculture policy?
Well to be fair, liquid homeopathic meds can cure dehydration.
So, if I eat GMO, then use GMO in my homeopathic cure (you know with less than one molecule per dose of GM plant material) it should even out, right? No cancer-causing chemicals in my body thanks to the GMO cure?
I think that’s how it works.
Brilliant
Here’s an actual, intelligent debate on gmos. https://youtu.be/S7iLPJMEkiU
Laughable!
Laughable, yet you can not post a better one.. hmm.
A better laughable one? No I can’t. lol
How about a non-laughable one, where your arguments aren’t shown to be outrageous and unsupported.
How about this one?
https://tvo.org/video/programs/the-agenda-with-steve-paikin/judging-gmos
Nice, I haven’t heard this one yet. However, at least IQ^2 debate had actual scientists on the opposition panel.
You mistake real scientists with agenda driven go along to get along industry junk pseudo-scientists.
Haha. That is an adequate description of Benbrooke, I guess
No, but that’s a great depiction of yourself.
Nonsense Dr Benbrook is an honest scientist who has disclosed the sources of his funding, but yet like all scientists who work conflicts with the GMO pesticide industry agenda, Benbrook is demonized by the sold out junk pseudo-scientists who are not even willing to admit to themselves that they have been corrupted by industry agenda.
Strange you would give an opinion before you have seen the video.
I’m watching the video now. I already have an opinion on Druker. What’s his contribution to science?
He has exposed the corruption of the government process that approved GMOs illegally and that continue to allow untested cancer causing Roundup/glyphosate laden GMOs introduced into the environment with out any safety testing.
I know your fine with corruption if it serves your agenda but decent people want a fair open process that looks at all the data and does what is in the best interest of the people they are pledged to serve.
He does this by selling books and taking money for lectures.
So you say. Can you cite a source for your industry PR BS?
yeah amazon, overstock, ebay.
You are trolling.
how noble
There is nothing noble about expecting government agencies to do what the people they represent ask them to do. Apparently you are in favor of captured industry controlled governmental institutions. Corruption is fine with you so long as it supports your industry agenda.
Really a syringe. FAIL.
And it is full of green GMOz, everyone knows that you only inject purple GMO juice into apples or they will turn into turnips…No one wants that.
Wow, you have attracted some nasty GMO pesticide industry operative trolls who try and spin away the facts that conflict with the GMO pesticide industry agenda.
Fact require citation, which this article contains none. Thanks faceless random person from the internet.
The article is full of accurate facts. That is why you and the rest of the motley mind controlled industry troll army are here to try and spin it away.
Care to back that up with citations?
I don’t provide citations to agenda driven mind controlled industry trolls.
that’s convenient for you.
It is a waste of time. They are not here to provide any facts. They are here to spin away the truth that gets told by truth tellers. I will always provide citations to those who ask with integrity.
Speaking of, where are your citations?
I can quote the NAS gmo report all day long to show this article to be wrong in many aspects.
The NAS report is not serious science. The NAS has a huge conflict of interest.
National Academy is taking funding from biotechnology firms and using “pro-GMO scientists” to write its reports.
Notable Biotech Corporate Donations to the National Academy of Sciences NAS Donor and Amount:
Monsanto $1-$5 million
DuPont $1-$5 million
Dow Chemical $1-$5 million
Companies and Industry Associations on the NRC Board Overseeing GMO Projects, 1987-Present:
Monsanto
DuPont
Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO)
Calgene
Cargill
General Mills
Novus International
Nestlé Purina
Pioneer Hi-Bred
2014-2016 NRC Committee Members With Ties to Industry or GMO Advocacy
David Stelly – Texas A&M – Research collaborator with Monsanto, Bayer, Dow Agrosciences
Neal Stewart – University of Tennessee – Consulted for Dow Agrosciences and Syngenta 36 patents on GMOs
Richard Dixon – University of North Texas – Consulted for Monsanto four times; received more than $1 million from biotech industry for research has patents on GMOs
Bob Whitake – Produce Marketing Association – Works for organization sponsored by Monsanto and Bayer
Karen Hokanson – Donald Danforth Plant Science Center – Consults with Monsanto-sponsored organizations and a pro-GMO group
Bruce Hamaker – Purdue University – Director of research center funded by biotech industry
Richard Amasino – University of Wisconsin Patents on GMOs – He also engages in pro-GMO political advocacy
Dominique Brossard – University of Wisconsin – Previously worked for a Monsanto-partner organization that helps commercialize GMOs advocates in media in favor of GMO
Peter Kareiva – The Nature Conservancy – Works for organization that receives millions of dollars from biotech companies these companies also sit on a Nature Conservancy advisory board
Robin Buell – Michigan State University – Involved in GMO development.
patent related to GMOs
Jose Farck-Zepeda – International Food Policy Research Institute – Works for organization that supports GMOs; collaborates with industry supporters on research advocating use of GMOs in Africa
Kevin Pixley – International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center – Research collaborator with Syngenta Foundation works for organization that supports and develops GMOs
The report I cited contains much more of the same.
https://www(dot)foodandwaterwatch(dot)org/sites/default/files/ib_1605_nrcinfluence-final-web_0(dot)pdf
This is baseless. Why don’t you pick out specific scientific concerns so you don’t have to cite the “agenda driven” sources you claim to despise.
All industry trolls who are being faithful to the industry junk pseudo-science cult ideology will try and spin away the fact that the NAS has been captured and corrupted by the industry.
That is how junk science works.
Literally the same argument I just had with someone over global warming.
Are you a global warming denier too?
I agree with the scientific consensus. Care to remind me what that is for climate science and genetic engineering?
Science is not done by consensus and the is no consensus on GMO safety.
You are trying to confuse apples with oranges with your false equivalency attempt to confuse and deceive.
Unlike what you were just doing, which was what I was responding to. So you are telling me there is no consensus on climate change?
I have not mentioned climate change and many wonder why you are trying to change the subject and divert from the actual issues we were discussing.
The issue of not accept the vast majority of scientific studies and the opinions of vast majority of scientist in the field or otherwise.
No that’s what we are talking about.
As I said before science is about data and there is no scientific consensus that GMOs are safe for long term human consumption. If you can show me some data that shows otherwise we can discuss it.
Science is not done by consensus.
Says some not in science, never produced a scientific article, never participated in peer-review panel.
Here is a analysis of the available scholarly research published in a high impact journal, from a non-bias source. Their conclusions found zero evidence of hazard in 1,783 papers
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.3109/07388551.2013.823595?needAccess=true
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/313f15588c557062546425cce7549a4f7cd235652dc9838005426f1c2267ae00.png
You don’t know anything about me except what I post here.
You have linked to another review of cherry picked studies that assure the industry agenda will be supported by the results. These cherry picked reviews ignore any science that doesn’t support industry objectives.
So prove me wrong and post one of your science articles.
1783 cherries? Anything I post you will just claim that. No, you clarify why this is bias .
I have not made any claims about any studies here except the Seralini study that was peer reviewed three times and remains in the literature as a cite-able study today.
Cherry picked reviews are not studies. They are reviews of selected studies. It doesn’t take a genus to see how your industry plays that junk pseudo-science game.
NO CITATION ON YOUR OWN SCIENTIFIC CONTRIBUTION! not one.
Why do you have to trip all over yourself to cite one study? do you have 1782 more?
NO SIR, you have not shown why my post was bias and should be disregarded.
Look Thomas everyone can read the thread and see for themselves what I have posted.
You have not made a scientific contribution. You have posted industry spin and junk pseudo-science. Everyone can read it for themselves.
You need to own your own words.
ABSOLUTELY. I hope the world read this thread. I have my name right out in front.. Why are you running away. Why are you hiding in shame.
You refuse to post anything to demonstrate you have ability or scientific experience in any field, nor will you address the comprehensive analysis I just cited.
I OWN MY WORD AND MY OWN SCIENCE. I own them straight out, you want to call me on the phone right now, we can record the conversation with my face and we can plaster that all over the web.
YOU SIR, ARE RUNNING AWAY.
NOW cite your research or GTFO!
Everyone can see that sparkle plenty has correctly interpreted your posts and that you are here with an industry agenda.
Then I challenge you as well with the same proposal. Call me and we will record it, post the results to youtube.
Do you have the citation that is missing? Do you have credentials that are missing?
Information is ether valid or invalid. It has nothing to do with “credentials” the GMO pesticide industry is teaming with junk pseudo-scientist who have found go along to get along is the best way to get ahead. All of these people have “credentials”. I guess that makes them corrupted credentialed industry players. They remind me a lot of you.
You’re not even a different person
Whoa, Thomas, are you going off the deep end on us now?
I am not running away. I am here reading your self serving attempt to redeem yourself for your shameless industry shilling.
Still not a citation proving you have experience in any scientific field
Don’t give me that kind of elitist BS rhetoric.
I don’t provide citations to agenda driven industry operatives.
Still not an argument why Nicolia et al., 2014 is wrong in their interpretations.
I’ve all ready told you. It is part of a bogus cherry picked review. It’s pseudo-science PR nonsense.
That’s not an argument. You’re just claiming that without any evidence!
Many people agree with me and we have all the evidence needed to see through the industry junk pseudo-science smoke screen that you and other operatives are using to try and spin the facts away.
Ted, you make me laugh.
People who are out of touch with reality often laugh inappropriately.
You are trolling.
First, Seralini has not been peer reviewed 3 times. It is not citable, it has been published in a pay to play journal.
Second, lit reviews are more complicated then what you said, and even if true, the fact that they found almost 2000 studies to cherry pick versus your one discredited plan tells you that the science is not in your favor.
I could go on, but Thomas is doing a good job of putting you in your place. And he didn’t even mention your 10 other usernames.
Scoundrels and industry operative always attack the quality of the journal when they can not intelligently discuss the science.
The fact is this paper was peer reviewed three time and these peer reviews stand. The paper was republished and the data made available to other scientist and it remains in the cite-able literature today….
People who would like to read the actual facts about this desperate attempt by Monsanto to suppress this important study can read the facts here:
https://www(dot)sgr(dot)org(dot)uk/resources/scientific-publication-peril-seralini-affair
Please keep saying stuff like this. It makes is really easy to win this argument when I don’t have to defend actual science and figures, just point out your repetitive and cyclic use of shill accusations.
The is no argument, only data and facts.
Uh, no, Thomas up there is actually showing you how science works–observation, hypothesis, experimentation, etc. etc.
Science is about data. Without the data there would be no “observation, hypothesis, experimentation, etc. etc.”.
Maybe your industry hides the studies because they do not want their “observation, hypothesis, experimentation, etc. etc.” validated by independent scientists or reviewers.
At any rate we know that you are an agenda driven industry troll and not a scientist. All you have is your PR scripts and lies.
There is plenty of data.
Yes, and the data from Monsanto’s own studies show that Monsanto knew over 35 years ago that Rounup/glyphosate caused cancer. They hid the science as a trade secret and colluded with the EPA who approve glyphosate over the objections of their own staff scientists.
That was one memo you are talking about. And you are inaccurately describing the situation.
No I am telling the truth.
Please tell us, specifically. why you think I am inaccurately describing the situation.
NAS? lol Keep trying.
Well he is not nameless or faceless, but for the sake of everyone on this message board I will not share the info. There are enough pics of creepy old dudes already on the inertubes..Your welcome./
Nasty? who are you, Donald Trump?
No, but you are an industry troll who is looking for a fight.
You have evidence for that? other than someone disagrees with you?
Yes. It was you that called me Donald Trump.
You are a troll.
Yup, the pro-GMO vanguard is already here. Robert Wager is a well known pro-GMO spokesperson and advocate. I see he is still trolling social media articles to defend and promote the agrochemical/biotech industry…
hy·poc·ri·sy /həˈpäkrəsē/ (See above)
Industry troll . TROLL … (see above)
I don’t work for industry. never have
Most trolls don’t. They are usually employed by shady cut out contractor that give he industry the ability to deny any affiliation.
I defend science for free. My papers have nothing to do with industry. I don’t need a PhD to defend the conclusions on genetic engineering, but I do.
We can all see that you are a troll who is trolling.
Science needs no defense, while industry junk pseudo-science cult ideology must be protected from real science and the truth at all costs.
We can all see which you are defending.
We can all see which you are defending..
We can all see what you’re doing..
We can see what you mean..
We can all see who you work for..
You’re not even original. Multiple random accounts faceless, unverifiable.
We can all see that you are an agenda driven industry operative who is sensitive to being exposed by the truth.
Nope just allergic to complete ignorance.
It must be tough being allergic to ignorance. What happens when you look in the mirror? Do you break out in hives?
/r/ GOOSE.. log out to nameless account, log on to another nameless account, harass repeat .
Pure industry troll nonsense, as usual from this DKD guy loser.
You are certainly an expert at spewing agenda drive obfuscation and ignorance.
To be “exposed” you’d have to actually bring up a point.
The point is that you have been exposed as an industry operative troll.
As I said,
Science needs no defense, while industry junk pseudo-science cult
ideology must be protected from real science and the truth at all costs.
We can all see which you are defending.
So are you a GMO farmer?
Nope, plant pathologist and fungal geneticist. Specifically, I study mycotoxigenic fungi.
Yes, you are an agenda driven troll who claims to be a scientist.
did I confuse you with fancy terms? I have published science and a degree.
There are many industry trolls with claimed degrees. All we know about you is what you are doing here, and you are trolling.
Wow, nice sentence structure.
Like it or lump it, troll.
or just disregard
Ted up there is not the swiftest of the anti-GMO crowd. But he didn’t lose that contest by much.
It took me 4.5 years to claim that degree. All I needed was a dissertation, course work, candidacy exams, countless hours in lab and the library.
If true, this explains a lot about where you are coming from. These days science has been funded and bought by chemical corps such as Monsanto etc. to fit their agenda and driven industry PR and false claims. Therefore, I don’t blame you for what they’ve taught you but I am sorry that they’ve brainwashed you with their pseudoscience and research bias and contamination. https://lifescivc.com/2011/03/academic-bias-biotech-failures/
I was taught by scientist to read scientific literature and successfully use the scientific method to advance our understanding of nature.
My academic teachers advanced the fields of genetics, discovered and studied mycotoxins that are some of the most hazardous and carcinogenic compounds known to mankind.
They amassed no fortunes doing this and achieved something far greater, A deeper understanding nature and staving off countless lives from tremendous suffering.
No, you are just way too brainwashed to understand and see the other side of it. https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
mycotoxins that are some of the most hazardous and carcinogenic compounds known to mankind.
But how do they taste? Danger, schmanger, put enough tomato sauce and cheese on them and you will be fine.
Or…we can just label the mycotoxin infested food as “certified organic”, double or triple the price and brainwashed consumers will trample one another to throw their grocery money away on the stuff. Heh, feed it to their kids, too.
People aren’t as dumb as you are portraying them to be
Lol, you certainly are that dumb.
Here’s something else you might want to read: https://gmwatch.org/news/latest-news/17348-the-new-food-fights-us-public-divides-over-food-science
44% of Americans say scientists understand this “fairly well”
and those people are deceiving themselves. Given American’s track record on climate change, STEM, and other scientific fields, I’d say this is also just a tragic.
Oh my, you are hysterical. Monsanto can’t afford to fund every scientist. Science is not in the back pocket of Monsanto.
Read again, I said “Chemical corps, such as Monsanto etc.” And, I did not say that they could fund “every” scientist. Quit while you are ahead.
But obviously that is what you meant when you complained that the science had been so seriously tainted that even the educators are led astray.
I have an idea, instead of claiming that the science is faulty because of Monsanto interference, why not breakdown, using logical arguments, where the science is faulty and how it is.
Go ahead, then we can talk. Until then, I take it you are going to rely on your conspiracy theory tripe and have no need for further discussion.
mycotoxigenic fungi.
Mmmm, tasty. How are they on pizzas?
A little deoxynivalenol in the crust and you will have no problems with room for seconds.
deoxynivaleno
Wow no wonder it is an unpopular inadvertent grain additive, I say call it “velvet grain pixie dust”, you could charge 4x more for it and if it was organic 10x more, cha ching. Bonus there would be far less scientific illiterates out there.
100% organic. It’s also called vomitoxin, because it makes pigs throw up uncontrollable. Weight lose drug, so that’ll cost extra. Too bad it functions by inhibiting ribosomes, but you know, details.
Ted, what are you talking about?
Look in the mirror and you will see, troll.
You know I am not Ted. You are trolling me.
If you are Ted, as I have been called this too, then Damo is Mikey.
I know of at least 20 posters who have been called Ted. These industry PR assets think if they can make people thing everyone who disagrees with their agenda is Ted that they are spinning the opposition away. It’s a losers claim to cover their inability to get any traction with the PR created industry lies.
That spells paranoia to me.
Yup. They are a paranoid bunch. I suppose that happens to those who choose to sell cancer causing poison food while purposely hiding the cancer causing Roundup/glyphosate laden GMOs in the North American food supply.
Or, more likely, you are Ted Miner, a whiny, old man who has multiple usernames. I mean it is not like it is true or anything.
But whatever, a few more posts and you will start on about echochamber and troll drool, just like you always do, Ted.
You are a troll, Damo. You are out of gas and you are trying to divert attention from your failure by bringing up your Ted game.
I’m proud to wear my Ted badge because the only people who are called Ted are those who blow holes in industry lies and post truthful verifiable information.
Go troll somewhere else.
What truthful, verifiable info have you presented?
Go troll somewhere else.
As Bill Nye pointed out about these opponents of GMOs “I don’t see much insight in this group”
Look into the future and you will see improvements like this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6xpQYaxiRc&feature=youtu.be
The GMOs on the market today are the model T’s of the genetic engineering. Technology, such as CRISPR and sheer Moore’s law breaking level of scientific improvement in genetic understanding, except much better crops for the future of mankind.
Now we can be trapped in this “You’re a shill troll” conversation, or we can invent our way out of environmental collapse and human suffering.
I choose the latter!
Bill Nye is a PR propaganda asset for Monsanto.
Nye has an undergraduate degree from Cornell and his grades were not good enough to get him into graduate school. Bill Nye is an entertainer not a scientist.
Monsanto flew him down to St. Louis, they worked out a deal and fitted him for the special shoes. Bill Nye is going to do for Monsanto what Ronald McDonald did for McDonalds
Bill Nye loves ‘science” all the way to the bank.
” .. and hes wrong about creationism and global warming”.. is the next sentence your about to say.
No he is wrong about GMOs.
Wow, I have heard the same argument used against Nye from other anti-science types (Global warming deniers), is there a handbook or something you guys use?
Maybe the global warming deniers were responsible for Nye’s immaculate conversion after they flew him to St. Louis and fitted him for the special shoes. No one needs to be a global warming denyer to see the way Nye has allowed himself to be corrupted bu Monsanto.
Whatever, Ted.
Or maybe Nye knows enough to say that the work he has seen is sound science?
That couldn’t be it–doesn’t fit into your conspiracy theory foolishness.
Tell it to Ted, troll.
Disclaimer: The medical information provided on here by Dr. Nini Iyizoba is provided as an information resource only.
So the good Dr that wrote this piece of crap doesn’t even stand by his own words….EPIC FAIL.
That WHO classified Glycophosphate as carcinogenic is a yesterday’s news. The now report by the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and WHO says that the chemical was“unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans from exposure through the diet”.
This article is base on a false rumor made by AAEM.
The original source of it is from AAEM, American Academy of Environmental Medicine, listed as a questionable organization and dubious certifying board by the American Board of Environmental Medicine. AAEM is not recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties. Health issues listed in the article are also proved to be wrong.
In April 1994 GMO food was introduced into the food system where I lived. No one told us and no one told our doctors that this was done to us. We both developed severe ‘Acid Reflux’ (GERD) and I developed Adult Onset Asthma. In Feb 2015 I learned about GMO food and we went ORGANIC end of Feb 2015. We stopped having Acid Reflux attacks and I stopped having Asthma. I am Asthma free as long as I do not eat anything that contains Glyphosate residues.
We will review and take appropriate action.