Peer-Reviewed Study Shatters FDA’s Biggest Lie about GMOs
The United States Food and Drug Administration originally decidedthat GMO crops are “safe” for consumption thanks to one controversial
method — employing the doctrine of so-called “substantial equivalence.”
This doctrine said that lab-created GMOs and regular crops are basically equal, and it only came about because of the Bush Administration’s close ties with Monsanto, which was having trouble getting them approved for human consumption.The government has long held this to be true, but new peer-reviewed
research by Dr. V.A. Shiva Ayyadurai is once again casting serious
doubt, showing at least two major, and quite frankly disturbing,
differences between GMO soy and natural soy.
Ayyadurai, who called out the FDA following his recent study, added that the current safety standards for testing GMO food are “outdated” and insufficient.
