Review 591: GMOs in General

Welcome to our latest Review, which covers illusory GMO PROMISES and also explains how a much-hyped GMO “solution” to the bee crisis might only serve to prop up a failed agricultural system (GMOs AS CRUTCH FOR FAILED AG MODEL). There’s some bad news on the issue of GENETICALLY ENGINEERING NATURE, as well as our TRIBUTE to the late Dame Jane Goodall, yet more GMO RISKS AND HARMS, and developments on PATENTS, REGULATORY CAPTURE, and GMO RELEASES AND APPROVALS. The issue of GMO CONTAMINATION is ongoing, as are the perennial topics of CORPORATE CONTROL and CORPORATE MYTHS. We also have some updates on FAKE MEAT and the latest NON-GMO SOLUTIONS.

In our next Review, which will follow soon after this one, we’ll summarise the continuing widespread resistance to GMOs around the world. And for recent news specific to new GMOs and the battles around the world over deregulation, see our last Review, archived here.

GMO PROMISES

The GMO illusion: Three decades of hype, harm, and false hope
We were asked to picture a world where there is plenty of food, no hunger, fields grow without chemical pesticides, children are saved from malnutrition, and people live healthily. Three decades later, the promises of GMOs lie across the fields like superweeds - costly, useless, and crowding out real alternatives. In 1995, with the approval of Bt maize and glyphosate-tolerant soy in the US, GMOs were touted as the silver bullet: eliminating hunger, reducing pesticides, boosting yields, and fortifying nutrition. But the dream, peddled by biotech giants and promoted by complicit research institutions, has proven illusory. A comprehensive exposé, GMO Promises, by Save Our Seeds, GMWatch, and Beyond GM, offers a reality check. Through ten meticulously documented case studies, the website lays bare a pattern of ecological harm, regulatory evasion, scientific failure, and corporate overreach.

GMOs AS CRUTCH FOR FAILED AG MODEL

GM food supplement for bees supports failed agricultural model
Scientists have developed a food supplement that “could help save honeybees from devastating declines”, according to a press release from the University of Oxford, where the lead researcher is based. The scientists used transgenesis (foreign gene insertion) augmented with gene editing to produce a strain of yeast that could be used as a food supplement for bees. The food supplement contains six essential sterols – types of fat – that are found in pollen, the usual main food source for bees. The resulting bee food supplement is being promoted as “a nutritionally complete diet” that “boosted reproduction up to 15-fold”. However, it carries its own risks. These include perpetuating an unsustainable agricultural model, as well as potentially creating additional problems of its own due to the inherent dangers stemming from the large-scale biochemical changes arising from the GM process.

GENETICALLY ENGINEERING NATURE

IUCN backs risky genetic engineering in nature, rejects call for precaution

In a widely anticipated but deeply concerning decision, members of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) have implicitly endorsed the use of genetic engineering in nature conservation — despite insufficient scientific evidence and the absence of effective regulations to manage its risks. By rejecting a proposed moratorium on high-risk applications such as gene drives, IUCN has decided to ignore the need for adequate safeguards against irreversible harm to nature. These technologies could permanently alter or eradicate species, triggering cascading effects across entire ecosystems. To pass, the motion needed more than 50% support in both categories — governments and non-governmental organisations — and it came down to a close call. Among governments, the result was 87 in favour and 88 against. Among non-governmental organisations, the result was 407 in favour and 323 against. See also Beyond GM's article on the IUCN's move.

Chimera: The genetic modification of nature
In September, GeneWatch UK published a report, “Chimera: The Genetic Modification of Nature – A briefing”, for the IUCN Congress at which the vote was taken on the proposed moratorium on genetic engineering of nature (see above). The briefing summarises concerns about the use of genetic engineering (including gene editing) to create GMOs for release into the wild. It was written to draw the attention of members of the IUCN to serious problems associated with plans to develop the use of synthetic biology in nature conservation. The report concludes that all claimed benefits of genetically modifying nature have major potential downsides. GMWatch wholeheartedly recommends this report, which is clear, accessible, and uncompromising.

A TRIBUTE

RIP Dame Jane Goodall

We at GMWatch were sad to hear of the death, at the age of 91, of the primatologist Dame Jane Goodall. She was a pioneer researcher into animal sentience, especially as it related to her beloved chimpanzees, which she observed in their natural habitat. She outraged the scientific and academic community by giving the chimps names and commenting on their personalities. In 1960 she was the first to document their use of tools – at the time, a skill that was frequently claimed to be unique to humans. Jane was also concerned about the effects of GM foods and pesticides on health and the environment. Only a few days before her death she was in Mexico, where she praised the country’s brilliant resistance to Bayer-Monsanto and the planting of GM corn. On pesticides, she said, “Someday we shall look back on this dark era of agriculture and shake our heads. How could we have ever believed that it was a good idea to grow our food with poisons?”

GMO RISKS AND HARMS

Are GMOs safe? A molecular geneticist speaks out
Are genetically engineered foods safe? In an interview with Stacy Malkan of US Right to Know, the leading molecular genetics expert Prof Michael Antoniou discusses the scientific evidence behind health concerns tied to GM corn and pesticides, how GMOs are changing in ways that increase health risks, and how regulatory systems have failed to keep pace with modern genetics. Prof Antoniou has studied for more than 35 years how genes function and how they are disrupted. His decades of rigorous independent research into the risks of GM foods and glyphosate-based herbicides have raised serious concerns about the safety of these technologies. In a report he prepared for the Mexican government, as the country attempted to restrict GMO corn imports for health reasons, Prof Antoniou cited “a large body of evidence from well-controlled laboratory animal toxicity studies that show evidence of harm to multiple physiological systems” from toxic agents found in GM corn. The transcript of part 1 of the interview is here; part 2 is here – see also below.

Not substantially equivalent: New scientific methods challenge claims that GMOs are safe
In part 2 of an interview with US Right to Know's Stacy Malkan, Prof Michael Antoniou explains the findings of his team’s extensive research on glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicide formulations, which he said shows that regulators are “clearly wrong” in claiming that current exposure levels are safe for our health. Prof Antoniou also explains how his research challenges the claim that GMOs are “substantially equivalent” to non-GMOs — the foundation of US regulations for GMOs — and how regulators are ignoring modern scientific tests and methods that can help us better understand the risks to our health from GMOs and pesticides.

Another long-term feeding study raises questions about the safety of GM maize

A long-term 7-year feeding study testing the effects of GM maize consumption across two generations of cynomolgus macaques – a type of monkey – was recently published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology. The GM maize tested contains two Bt insecticidal toxins and a gene conferring tolerance to glyphosate herbicide. The authors concluded that there are no adverse effects on the test animals or their offspring – even though some of their findings raise serious safety questions. The GM maize diet caused some adverse and potentially adverse changes in the macaques’ health that need further investigation. These include indications of anaemia, kidney and thyroid disorders, and an altered gut microbiome.

GM gene-edited tomatoes to be fed to humans (but no, it's not a food safety study)
The Quadram Institute in Norwich is recruiting 76 people with low vitamin D to take part in the ViTaL-D Study, where some participants will eat soup containing tomatoes that have been genetically engineered via gene editing to contain a vitamin D precursor. When the fruit is placed under ultraviolet light, vitamin D forms. While the BBC headlines its article on the GM vitamin D tomato study “Trial uses tomatoes to test impact of gene-edited food on humans” and touts it as probably “the first human trial in the UK”, this 21-day study is not a food safety study and it won’t “test the impact of a gene-edited food on humans”, in the sense of monitoring the health of GM tomato-consuming people over the medium or longer term. Instead, it will be an efficacy study, where the scientists will measure the levels of vitamin D in the blood after consuming meals containing the GM tomatoes. In other words, it’s a study designed with marketing in mind, not precaution about human health.

GMWatch publishes historic recordings of scientist Arpad Pusztai

GMWatch has published a series of recorded interviews with the late scientist Dr Arpad Pusztai, conducted in 2002 by the journalist Andy Rowell as part of his research for his book, Don’t Worry, It’s Safe to Eat. Dr Pusztai carried out the first safety research on a GM food plant. Andy kindly gifted this interview archive of recordings to GMWatch and wishes them to be made public. In these interviews Dr Pusztai describes the results of his landmark 1999 study that found that GM insecticidal potatoes had toxic effects on rats. He also details the political fallout from his public announcement of these findings in a brief 150-second appearance on British TV, in which he said he would not eat these potatoes and that it was unfair to use our fellow citizens as guinea pigs by putting GM foods into the food supply. For his pains, Dr Pusztai was summarily fired and barred from access to his lab. His research team was disbanded and a gagging order was imposed on him.

Ladybird populations affected by Bt maize pollen
A study has shown that pollen from GM maize MON810 can have negative effects on ladybird populations. Currently, MON810 is the only GM plant approved for cultivation in the EU. The study investigates long-term effects of Bt pollen on beneficial insects not naturally expected to be adversely affected by the toxin. The experiment showed that the lifespan of the offspring of female ladybirds that had consumed Bt pollen was reduced by 17–30 percent.

In Symbiosis film will show in Leeds on 1 and 3 November
The film In Symbiosis, which analyses what’s wrong with the food system (including GMOs and pesticides) and how it might be put right, has been selected for Leeds international film festival and will be showing on 1st and 3rd November. The film features interviews with GMWatch editor Claire Robinson, as well as molecular geneticist Prof Michael Antoniou and other experts. GMWatch readers have asked us when the film might be available on general release. The answer is: eventually, but initial release is taking place via film festivals. It seems that the festivals won’t consider showing a film that has already been publicly released.

PATENTS

Entangled in the patent web
As co-owner of a family seed breeding business, Grietje Raaphorst usually spends her days tending to the corn plants that fill her fields. She carefully crosses them or harvests seeds from the cobs that she and her husband have spent decades adapting to thrive in the Dutch climate. Yet for the past three years, she has spent more time dealing with large seed companies and their patent lawyers than with corn kernels and pollen. The Raaphorsts’ goal was to develop cold-resistant crops that could be harvested earlier in the year, so that the soil would be spared the damage caused by heavy machinery during a wet autumn harvest. But since the German seed company KWS patented a method for growing cold-resistant maize in 2022, Raaphorst’s company, Nordic Maize, has been at risk of being taken to court for infringing this patent. A patent blocks use and commercialisation, unless an expensive licence is paid. “For traditional breeders such as Nordic Maize, this is a matter of life and death,” says Christoph Then of No Patents on Seeds. New GMO techniques, such as CRISPR-Cas, would make it even easier for large agricultural corporations to satisfy their hunger for new patents. (Link is to Dutch language article)

REGULATORY CAPTURE

GMOs and glyphosate: Regulators use double standards when evaluating scientific evidence indicating harm
UK, US and European regulatory institutions have for many years been repeatedly subjecting evidence of possible harm from constituents of our food supply to severe critical scrutiny, while accepting seemingly reassuring studies and data uncritically, a new peer-reviewed article shows. Drawing on the details of regulatory debates over four key issues, including the sole GM maize variety that’s approved to grow in the EU (MON810) and glyphosate, the authors document regulators’ consistently asymmetric treatment of evidence (more commonly known as “double standards”), which has served to benefit commercial interests to the detriment of consumer protection.

GMO RELEASES (PLANNED AND ACTUAL) AND APPROVALS

GM wheat gets closer to reality in US
On September 23, Bioceres, the Argentine company that owns the technology, signed a deal with the Colorado Wheat Research Foundation (CWRF) to commercialise its GM wheat HB4 in the US. Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay have approved the cultivation of HB4 wheat. Other countries, including Australia and New Zealand, have authorised its use in food and feed products. In August 2024, the US Dept of Agriculture approved the cultivation of HB4 wheat. However, American farmers won’t be planting GM wheat for a while, probably not until 2029, 2030 or later. HB4 wheat is marketed as drought-resistant and as tolerant to the herbicide glufosinate ammonium, which is banned in the EU due to concerns about its toxicity. But according to official data, HB4 wheat yields much less than conventional (non-GMO) wheats, even in drought years.

Three genetically engineered fruits and vegetables sold in Canada
The Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN) reports that there are now just three genetically engineered (genetically modified or GM) fruits and vegetables sold in Canadian grocery stores: sweetcorn, GM papaya, and a GM pink-fleshed pineapple, but these products are not widely available. However, produce sections could quickly be confronted with more GMOs now that the federal government is exempting many new gene-edited foods from regulation. Genetic engineering in Canadian diets is still dominated by processed food ingredients – from GM corn, GM canola, GM soy and GM sugar beet.

Chile approves first gene-edited wheat in the Americas
Chilean startup Neocrop Technologies has developed a gene-edited wheat variety with five to ten times higher dietary fibre content than conventional flour wheat, “while maintaining the taste, texture, and quality of white flour”. Chile’s Agricultural and Livestock Service (SAG) has stated that these new wheat lines are not classified as GMOs (even though technically and scientifically, they are). This decision paves the way for field cultivation without regulatory oversight, making Chile the first country in the Americas to approve gene-edited wheat. (No explanation is given in this article as to why people who want high fibre wheat can’t eat wholewheat products, which are naturally high in fibre, rather than GMO white flour.)

Norfolk Healthy Produce selling GM Purple Tomato seedlings in the US
Norfolk Healthy Produce has been selling its GM Purple Tomato seedlings during the 2025 season at garden centres in the US.

Regulators assessing bid to grow and sell GM Purple Tomato in Australia
The GM Purple Tomato could be sold in Australian supermarkets next year if regulators approve a bid to grow it in Australia. Read GeneEthics’ objection here.

India: Plans afoot to legalise herbicide-tolerant GM Bt cotton
India’s government is planning to legalise the controversial herbicide-tolerant (HT) Bt cotton (HT Bt cotton). The expert committee on HT Bt cotton seeds has given a positive recommendation for its commercial cultivation to the top biosafety regulatory body, the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC). Environmentalists are concerned that the approval may lead to farmers indiscriminately spraying glyphosate herbicide. This practice raises concerns about potential negative impacts on the environment and other crops grown in nearby fields. HT Bt cotton cultivation has been occurring illegally in Gujarat, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, and Telangana for years. Some comments are here.

GMO CONTAMINATION

Mustard industry on edge over canola hybrid
Leaders in Canada’s mustard industry are worried that a new GM canola hybrid, not yet on the market, could harm mustard exports to Europe and other parts of the globe. Mustard importers in countries such as France have almost zero tolerance for GMOs in shipments of mustard seed. This new canola hybrid will increase the risk of GMO contamination, said Rick Mitzel, executive director of Sask Mustard. “There is a miniscule tolerance (for GMOs). It’s very, very tiny, as close to zero as you can get,” he said. “Any field of condiment mustard (seed) that’s anywhere close to a field of this InVigor Gold is definitely going to get (GMO) contamination.” The canola is tolerant to Liberty Link (glufosinate) herbicide.

2024, another year contaminated by illegal GMOs
In 2024, the EU once again recorded alerts about GMO contamination. Of the 24 alerts, the vast majority concerned unauthorised GM rice, but also papaya, soy, flax and maize. Two cases of contamination by genetically modified microorganisms were also reported, one of which even forced the Belgian authorities to issue a public statement recalling a product. In three cases, the nature of the illegal GMO was not specified. One GM maize, one flax, two papayas and one soybean were also found in 2024, either on European territory or at its border.

Illegal cultivation of GMO soybeans in Tunisia revealed by DNA tests
Presented as a response to the feed crisis, a new crop is quietly taking root in Tunisian fields. Behind the soybeans are GM seeds, introduced without supervision and amid total institutional silence. Laboratory analyses carried out in Tunisia and then in France on three samples of soybean seeds distributed to Tunisian farmers show them to be GMO. The soybean samples are tolerant to several herbicides: glyphosate, glufosinate-ammonium, 2,4-D and dicamba, and produce several insecticides against lepidoptera (butterflies). These transgenes belong to Monsanto (Bayer), BASF, and Dow AgroSciences.

CORPORATE CONTROL

Corporate concentration in food and farming in 2025
A report examines the state of corporate concentration in six sectors critical to agriculture: commercial seeds, pesticides, synthetic fertilisers, farm machinery, animal pharmaceuticals and livestock genetics. Corporate consolidation has increased in recent years in most of these sectors and four of them - seeds, pesticides, agricultural machinery and animal pharmaceuticals - meet the definition of an oligopoly, in that just four companies (Bayer, Corteva, Syngenta and BASF) control more than 40% of the market.

CORPORATE MYTHS

The enduring fantasy of “feeding the world”
In an important essay, the food scholars Adam Calo, Maywa Montenegro, Ben Iuliano and Alastair Iles debunk the feed-the-world myth of industrial agriculture. In its latest repackaging, this myth with its fixation on boosting yield is being promoted not just as the remedy for global hunger through greater output, but as using less land – due to its efficiency in commodity production, and hence the way to leave more land available for nature. But the authors show that industrial agriculture has not only proven bad at feeding people, failing to budge food insecurity, but it doesn’t lead to “land sparing” either.

Commentary on the “feeding the world” fantasy
The anthropologist Dr Andrew Flachs, who researches food and agriculture systems, has done a Bluesky thread commenting on Adam Calo et al’s essay (see item above). In this thread, Flachs highlights “a depth of research on this issue, which is just so much more than yields vs hunger”.

Is famous proof of the triumph of science the most deceptive graph ever made?
Nobody is better at debunking the myths of industrial agriculture than Glenn Davis Stone. It was Stone who famously pointed out that new research suggested the claim of a “billion lives saved” by the Green Revolution, which is so often used as a framing for GM crops, was not just badly wrong but that the number of lives actually saved appeared to be zero. In a piece on another key component of industrial agriculture mythology, Stone looks at “the most reproduced chart in anything ever written on agriculture”, which shows the meteoric rise in US corn yields following the adoption of hybrid corn. This also gets used, as Stone notes, to validate GM crop technologies. But in reality, as he explains, the yield rises were due to other factors than hybrids – and “If the input-intensive, over-producing corn hybrids were a disaster in the 20th century, they are likely to be even worse in the 21st”. Stone concludes, "At the end of the day, we have not only spent a taxpayer fortune subsidising farmers to use toxic chemicals to grow vast quantities of uneconomic and unneeded corn, but to do so with hybrids that are highly unstable in weather extremes.”

FAKE MEAT

Consumers are losing interest in fake meat, says article
The plant-based "fake meat" alternatives market is declining as consumers have begun to shift back towards real meat and dairy, according to an article in Food Navigator. The article explains that that the main reason is health: consumers increasingly associate plant-based options with ultra-processed foods, which many distrust. Conversely, meat and dairy have been consumed for thousands of years and are associated with naturalness. The article claims another driver for the shift is that consumers are increasingly placing less importance on sustainability. But in reality, the sustainability rating of all ultra-processed foods, and especially “bioreactor” fake meat and dairy, is rock bottom. Some fake meat is made from GM bacteria or yeast.

GMWatch correction on soy leghemoglobin and news update
In August GMWatch published a correction to one point from our extensive comments to the European Food Safety Authority about the Authority's favourable opinions on the GM food supplement soy leghemoglobin, which “fake meat” burger company Impossible Foods has submitted for EU approval. We also submitted this correction directly to EFSA. Interestingly, our correction raises further questions about EFSA’s opinions, which we have put to them. In response to this communication, we received a reply from EFSA saying that they will issue revised opinions and re-open the comments period. They didn't specify a date. The planned revision appears to be partly aimed at addressing complaints about the numerous redactions in the original EFSA opinions, which hid crucial details about the complex series of genetic modifications made to the GM yeast that produces the soy leghemoglobin. The redactions were made in the name of commercial confidentiality. However, transparency about the modifications is important because they could affect food safety. GMWatch will submit updated comments on the revised opinions when they appear. (Link is to GMWatch correspondence to EFSA)

NON-GMO SOLUTIONS

Sixteen year field trial shows organic corn outcompetes chemical-intensive fields in Kenya
In a sixteen-year field trial based in Kenya, researchers have found higher crop yield stability in low-input organic systems with previously degraded soil than in high-input organic and nonorganic agricultural systems. One of the agrichemical industry-fed arguments against organic production is the false belief that, if all agricultural production went organic, then it would lead to a crisis of food security. Proponents of transitioning to organic continually push back, given the steady flow of evidence, backed by decades-long field trials, that organic can compete with — and even outcompete — conventional systems after a transitional period. “Based on the findings of our study, organic farming systems have the potential to achieve yields that match or exceed those of conventional farming systems, particularly in the long term when given adequate time for soil adaptation and improvement in soil fertility,” the authors write.

Organic systems more sustainable and profitable, 40-year study finds
There is increasing evidence that organically managed crop production systems are more sustainable than chemical-intensive fields, or those that operate under the model of pesticide reduction, in terms of biodiversity, public health, and climate mitigation. The Rodale Institute, Ohio State University, and Tennessee State University determined in a study based on field trials that organic grain cropping systems contain higher concentrations of total nitrogen and soil organic carbon, exceeding those found in conventional, chemical-intensive systems. This study is an extension of the Rodale Institute’s Farming System Trial (FST), a 40-year-long field study published in 2020 with the goal of addressing "the barriers to the adoption of organic farming”. The FST finds:
* Organic systems achieve 3–6 times the profit of conventional production;
* Yields for the organic approach are competitive with those of conventional systems (after a five-year transition period);
* Organic yields during stressful drought periods are 40% higher than conventional yields;
* Organic systems leach no toxic compounds into nearby waterways (unlike pesticide-intensive conventional farming;
* Organic systems use 45% less energy than conventional; and
* Organic systems emit 40% less carbon into the atmosphere.

Brazil beats hunger. GM wasn’t part of the solution
Brazil is officially removed from the UN Hunger Map – after lifting over 40 million people out of food insecurity in just two years, the UN confirms. This historic achievement was driven not by techno-fixes or increased yields, but by political choices that put family farmers and food access first.

New non-GM drought-tolerant durum wheat variety proves its worth in Morocco
Released in 2023, Jawahir, “an improved durum wheat variety, serves as a resilient solution to the challenges of climate change in dry areas by offering disease and pest resistance, drought tolerance, higher grain and straw yields, as well as cost savings, thereby enhancing farmers’ income and sustainability”. The new drought-tolerant durum wheat variety yields significantly higher than other varieties under dry conditions and is being rapidly scaled up to provide food security for farmers in Morocco, particularly in the face of climate change.

GMWatch News Review archive

Review 591: GMOs in General

GMO PROMISES