One of the biggest scams Monsanto perpetrated against consumers was getting its GMO crops declared “substantially equivalent” to non-GMO crops—a coup that allowed the biotech industry to unleash GMOs into the food system with no independent pre-market safety testing.
First, a little history on substantial equivalence:
The concept of ‘Substantial Equivalence’ was first introduced in 1993 by the Organisation for Economic Development (OECD), an international economic and trade organisation, not a public health body. The principle states that if a new food is found to be substantially equivalent to an already existing food product, it can be treated the same way as the existing product with respect to safety. This concept has greatly benefited the trade of GM produce, allowing it to effectively bypass regulatory requirements that would apply to novel food and other products including novel chemical compounds, pharmaceuticals, pesticides and food additives, all of which require a range of toxicological tests and can be subject to legal limitations on safe consumption/intake.
Independent (as in not on the biotech industry’s payroll) scientists who have previously argued that GMO foods are not substantially equivalent to non-GMO foods have been dissed and discredited by Monsanto.
Now there’s a new peer-reviewed study led by Dr. Michael Antoniou at King’s College London, that once again suggests that GMO foods—at least a specific variety of Monsanto’s Roundup-Ready GMO corn—are nowhere near to being “equivalent” to non-GMO foods.
And what makes this Roundup-Ready corn “different,” say the authors of the most recent study, has serious implications for your health.
Submit your review