Dramatic Correlation Shown Between GMOs and 22 Diseases (2024)

There is a growing movement for labeling of GMO crops, and many would go further and ban GMOs completely. Currently there is a close vote in Oregon on a GMO labeling initiative, with advocates for labeling 0.3% behind and raising money to check ballots (we urge your support). Those who profit from GMOs spent $20 million to prevent labeling in Oregon. Several states in the Northeast have put in place laws that will require labeling.

Vermont is about to be sued to prevent GMO labeling. GMO profiteers have an unusual marketing strategy. While most companies brag about their product, the GMO industry spends hundreds of millions to hide their product. The US does not require labeling of GMOs despite the fact that 64 countries around the world label GMO foods.

Millions have marched against Monsanto urging labeling or the banning of GMO products. There is a national consensus in favor of labeling but the government has been unable to respond. Indeed, President Obama's food czar is a former Monsanto executive. The deep corruption of government is putting the health of the American people at serious risk.
The research highlighted below, "Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate and the deterioration of health in the United States of America," was published in The Journal of Organic Systems this September and links GMOs to 22 diseases with very high correlation. We reprinted many of the graphs from the study that show an incredible correlation between the rise of GMO crops that use the herbicide glyphosate and a wide range of diseases.

Glyphosate was introduced to the marketplace in 1974 but data on its use is only available since 1990. Monsanto has genetically modified foods so that they are resistant to glyphosate, a herbicide Monsanto sells, resulting in a dramatic increase in the use of glyphosate. The study points out that research has shown that "glyphosate disrupts the ability of animals, including humans, to detoxify xenobiotics. This means that exposures to the numerous chemicals in food and the environment, such as endocrine disrupting chemicals and carcinogens, could be causing levels of damage that would not occur if the body were able to detoxify them."

Correlation is not proof of causation. But the authors point out "we have data for 22 diseases, all with a high degree of correlation and very high significance. It seems highly unlikely that all of these can be random coincidence." They point out that according to "the American Academy of Environmental Medicine's position paper on genetically modified (GM) foods: '[S]everal animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food consumption including infertility, immune dysregulation, accelerated aging, dysregulation of genes associated with cholesterol synthesis, insulin regulation, cell signaling, and protein formation, and changes in the liver, kidney, spleen and gastrointestinal system.'"

The conclusions of the study are:

"These data show very strong and highly significant correlations between the increasing use of glyphosate, GE crop growth and the increase in a multitude of diseases. Many of the graphs show sudden increases in the rates of diseases in the mid-1990s that coincide with the commercial production of GE crops. The large increase in glyphosate use in the US is mostly due to the increase in glyphosate-resistant GE crops.

"The probabilities in the graphs and tables show that it is highly unlikely that the correlations are a coincidence. The strength of the correlations shows that there is a very strong probability that they are linked somehow. The number of graphs with similar data trends also indicates a strong probability that there is a link. Although correlation does not necessarily mean causation, when correlation coefficients of over 0.95 (with p-value significance levels less than 0.00001) are calculated for a list of diseases that can be directly linked to glyphosate, via its known biological effects, it would be imprudent not to consider causation as a plausible explanation.

"We do not imply that all of these diseases have a single cause as there are many toxic substances and pathogens that can contribute to chronic disease. However, no toxic substance has increased in ubiquity in the last 20 years as glyphosate has. . . . Another critical issue is that glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor and it has been argued that there are no safe levels of endocrine disruptors. This would imply that the current permitted residue levels in food could be causing multiple health problems that have been documented in the scientific literature to be caused by endocrine disrupting chemicals." [Citations omitted]
A root cause of the problem is that United States' regulatory structure is backward, making people into guinea pigs instead of protecting them. As the researchers write:

"... the regulatory approach in the US is reactionary rather than precautionary. Instead of taking preventive action when uncertainty exists about the potential harm a chemical or other environmental contaminant may cause, a hazard must be incontrovertibly demonstrated before action is initiated. Instead of requiring industry to prove the safety of their devices or chemical products, the public bears the burden of proving that a given environmental exposure is harmful."

As to next steps, the researchers urge independent scientific research (sadly, too much research is funded by corporations that profit from GMO crops]. They write:

"The data presented in this paper highlight the need for independent scientific research to be conducted, especially in the areas of the endocrine disruption, cancer precursor, oxidative stress, gut microbiome and the Cytochrome P450 pathways. It is our hope that, in addition to more basic research in the form of toxicology and carcinogenic studies, epidemiology studies will be undertaken by experts in each of these disease categories."

In the meantime, people need to continue to take political action to require labeling, urge a new regulatory structure that applies the precautionary principle and urge the banning of GMO crops now that correlation to disease is being shown. There are a few things you can do to protect yourself from GMO foods: (1) Buy organic, (2) Look for the Non-GMO seal, (3) Avoid crops where GMO's are common.

The eight GM food crops are Corn, Soybeans, Canola, Cottonseed, Sugar Beets, Hawaiian Papaya (most) and a small amount of Zucchini and Yellow Squash. Sugar is likely to contain GMO beets unless it is labeled as pure cane sugar. Dairy is also likely to be GMO unless it is labeled No rBGH, rBST, or artificial hormones. Here's a non-GMO shopping guide for further assistance.

Below are some of the key charts from the Journal of Organic Systems study.

Dramatic Correlation Shown Between GMOs and 22 Diseases (2024)

FAQs

Are GMOs linked to any diseases? ›

These studies1 show that GMOs do not affect you differently than non-GMO foods. Do GMOs affect your health? GMO foods are as healthful and safe to eat as their non-GMO counterparts. Some GMO plants have actually been modified to improve their nutritional value.

What is the biggest concern with GMOs? ›

What are the new “unexpected effects” and health risks posed by genetic engineering?
  • Toxicity. Genetically engineered foods are inherently unstable. ...
  • Allergic Reactions. ...
  • Antibiotic Resistance. ...
  • Immuno-suppression. ...
  • Cancer. ...
  • Loss of Nutrition.

What are the statistics related to GMO? ›

In 2020, GMO soybeans made up 94% of all soybeans planted, GMO cotton made up 96% of all cotton planted, and 92% of corn planted was GMO corn. In 2013, GMO canola made up 95% of canola planted while GMO sugar beets made up 99.9% of all sugar beets harvested.

Why are GMOs controversial? ›

The key areas of controversy related to genetically modified food (GM food or GMO food) are whether such food should be labeled, the role of government regulators, the objectivity of scientific research and publication, the effect of genetically modified crops on health and the environment, the effect on pesticide ...

Do GMOs have proven to negatively affect human health? ›

Is GMO food safe? Currently, there is no evidence that GMO foods cause cancer, allergies, or any other health conditions.

Which GMO foods should I avoid? ›

If a food item isn't organic or doesn't have a Non-GMO Project seal, avoid products that come from the most common GMO crops. This includes corn, soy, canola, papaya, zucchini and yellow summer squash, sugar beets and cottonseed.

What are 3 negatives of GMOs? ›

The main concerns around GMOs involve allergies, cancer, and environmental issues — all of which may affect the consumer.

Why are GMOs banned in Europe? ›

One cause of European opposition to GMOs is that the advantage to agriculture and food production is often considered weak or non-existent, while the risks are considered substantial.

Why should GMOs be banned? ›

There are an enormous number of published scientific studies showing that GMOs and their associated pesticides a responsible for multiple serious health problems for people, animals, and the wider environment.

What do many scientists say about GMOs? ›

Myth: GMOs are not adequately tested

The resulting plants and foods are far more thoroughly tested than their conventional counterparts. Hundreds of scientific papers have assessed the safety of GM crops, and the vast majority found they are nutritionally equivalent to their conventional counterparts.

What foods are considered GMO? ›

Foods that are often modified include corn and soybeans. GMOs can be turned into products like cornstarch, corn syrup, soybean oil, canola oil, corn oil, or granulated sugar. Genetically modified cotton can be used in textiles, and scientists can change organisms to be used in medications like human insulin, too.

What is the most risk of GMOs? ›

The major risk from the production of the transgene will lie in the use of novel proteins or other molecules produced by the transgenic organisms. Either in the native form or, following modifications in the human body, such molecules could be inimical to human health (e.g. through allergies).

Are GMOs healthier than organic? ›

While organic crops are often touted as being nutritionally superior to conventional or GMO, there is little evidence to support this claim . In fact, numerous studies have found no significant nutritional advantage of organic over conventionally grown foods.

Why are people so worried about GMOs? ›

The biggest threat caused by GM foods is that they can have harmful effects on the human body. It is believed that consumption of these genetically engineered foods can cause the development of diseases which are immune to antibiotics.

How has a watermelon been genetically altered? ›

Watermelon breeders discovered that crossing a diploid plant (bearing the standard two sets of chromosomes) with a tetraploid plant (having four sets of chromosomes) results in a fruit that produces a triploid seed. (Yes, it has three sets of chromosomes.)

What are the negatives of GMOs? ›

On the other hand, the use of GMOs brings risks, such as:
  • Changes in the interaction between plant and biotic environment: Persistence and invasiveness; ...
  • Changes in the interaction between plant and abiotic environment: Alterations in Greenhouse Gas Emissions; ...
  • Harm to human or animal health: Toxicological effects;
Jan 28, 2021

Can GMOs cause mutation? ›

No. Eating GM food will not affect a person's genes. Most of the food we eat contains genes, although in cooked or processed foods, most of the DNA has been destroyed or degraded and the genes are fragmented. Our digestive system breaks them down without any effect on our genetic make-up.

References

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Velia Krajcik

Last Updated:

Views: 5741

Rating: 4.3 / 5 (54 voted)

Reviews: 93% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Velia Krajcik

Birthday: 1996-07-27

Address: 520 Balistreri Mount, South Armand, OR 60528

Phone: +466880739437

Job: Future Retail Associate

Hobby: Polo, Scouting, Worldbuilding, Cosplaying, Photography, Rowing, Nordic skating

Introduction: My name is Velia Krajcik, I am a handsome, clean, lucky, gleaming, magnificent, proud, glorious person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.