Biotech Industry Studies are Unreliable

Compared to drug research, the potential for industry manipulation in GM crop studies is considerably higher because unlike pharmaceutical testing, GM research has no standardized procedures dictated by the FDA.

Biotech companies who have been found guilty in the past of hiding toxic effects of their chemical products are now in charge of determining whether GM foods are safe for us to eat.  The summaries of the superficial research they voluntarily submit to the FDA do not identify most of the health risks of GMOs that have been identified by independent research scientists.

Pharmaceutical products can show serious side effects and still be approved but GM food cannot. This situation promotes an attitude of zero tolerance in industry-funded research for adverse reactions. Consequently, company funded feeding trials are designed to avoid finding problems.

When industry studies do show problems in GM-fed animals, the results are routinely ignored or dismissed as “not biologically significant” or due to “natural variations.” So it’s no surprise that industry GM studies are not usually published in peer-reviewed journals but often kept secret by companies and government.

Company evidence usually goes unchallenged and unverified by the FDA which has ignored the advice of it’s own scientists who have urged long term safety studies and warned that GMOs can create unpredictable, hard-to-detect side effects, including allergies, toxins, new diseases and nutritional problems.  In the critical arena of food safety research, the biotech industry is without accountability, standards, or peer-review. They’ve got bad science down to a science.