http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22287-s...<quoted text>A 2009 Brazilian study found that female rats fed GM soy for 15 months showed significant changes in their uterus and reproductive cycle, compared to rats fed organic soy or those raised without soy. The glyphosate in the soybeans is believed to be the cause of the problem as it throws off the delicate hormonal balance that governs the whole reproductive cycle.
No increase in yields: GMO soy decreased yields by up to 20 percent compared with non-GMO soy, and up to 100 percent failures of GMO cotton have been recorded in India.
In a 2009 French study, scientists discovered that glyphosate can kill the cells in the outer layer of the human placenta (the trophoblast membrane), which in turn can kill the placenta. Only 1/500th the amount needed to kill weeds was able to kill the cells. The amount is so small, according to the study authors, the "residual levels to be expected, especially in food and feed derived from Roundup formulation-treated crops" could be enough to "cause cell damage and even [cell] death."
A Canadian epidemiological study, which looked at nearly 4,000 pregnancies in 1,898 couples, women exposed to glyphosate during the three months before getting pregnant had a significantly higher risk of miscarriages, especially for those above 34 years of age. Fathers who were exposed to glyphosate before their wives got pregnant showed an increase in early delivery and spontaneous abortions.
No reduction in pesticide use: USDA data showed that GMO crops increased pesticide use by 50 million pounds from 1996 to 2003 in the United States.
GMO crops harm wildlife: Wastes from GMO corn impairs the growth of aquatic insects.
GMO food and feed have been linked to deaths and sicknesses: Both in the fields of India, and in lab tests around the world.
GMO food has also now been linked to Cancer.
GMO have created super-viruses.
GMO food has been linked to sterility.
GMOs also contribute to environmental damages.
The list goes on and on. There is not one single advantage to using GMO's.
Tom Sanders, head of nutritional research at King's College London, says that the strain of rat the French team used gets breast tumours easily, especially when given unlimited food, or maize contaminated by a common fungus that causes hormone imbalance, or just allowed to age. There were no data on food intake or tests for fungus in the maize, so we don't know whether this was a factor.
But didn't the treated rats get sicker than the untreated rats?
Some did, but that's not the full story. It wasn't that rats fed GM maize or herbicide got tumours, and the control rats did not. Five of the 20 control rats 25 per cent got tumours and died, while 60 per cent in "some test groups" that ate GM maize died. Some other test groups, however, were healthier than the controls.
Toxicologists do a standard mathematical test, called the standard deviation, on such data to see whether the difference is what you might expect from random variation, or can be considered significant. The French team did not present these tests in their paper. They used a complicated and unconventional analysis that Sanders calls "a statistical fishing trip".
Anthony Trewavas of the University of Edinburgh, UK, adds that in any case, there should be at least as many controls as test rats there were only 20 of the former and 80 of the latter to show how variably tumours appear. Without those additional controls, "these results are of no value", he says.