It is frequently claimed that GM foods are not properly tested, or that few independent studies have been published to establish their safety. Another claim is that food regulatory agencies rely exclusively on corporate information to decide whether GM food and feed are safe. This conventional ‘wisdom’ is wrong.

Photo by distopiandreamgirl via Flickr.

There has been little testing of the safety of non-GMO foods in the scientific literature, despite the well known dangers of breeding, such as with potatoes and celery, and despite the potential dangers posed with novel foods such as kiwi fruit and star fruit.

In contrast, there are hundreds of peer-reviewed studies in the scientific literature which document the general safety and nutritional wholesomeness of GM foods and feeds. Many of these tests are done as part of a comparative assessment between a GM variety and its non-GM counterpart. About 1/3 of the safety studies are funded by independent sources.

Of course, not everyone has access to the scientific literature, or the background to decrypt scientific jargon. To help everyone gain better access to the science, Biology Fortified, Inc. has created the GENetic Engineering Risk Atlas, GENERA for short. We all need to take care when evaluating claims about the risks of GMOs. Part of this process includes evaluating bias.