Peer-reviewed studies have found that GM foods have produced unintended toxic and allergenic effects as well as altered nutritional values in the animals that consumed them. Such results have been found in the feed industry’s own studies as well as in independent studies.

Most animal feeding studies on GMOs are short-term – too short to show long-term (chronic) effects such as organ failure, cancer, or reproductive problems. But when longer term independent studies that have been carried out, they have produced some particularly damning evidence concerning the prevalence of such sicknesses.

Humans ingesting products coming from animals fed GM foods are opening themselves to these toxins entering the gut and reproductive systems. Millions of humans and animals are therefore at risk so long as GM animal feeds are allowed to remain on the market.

The seriousness of this situation is emphasised by the fact that all large-scale commercial (non organic) farms producing dairy foods, eggs, pig and chicken meat, are purchasing GM maize and soya as the main ingredient for feeding their animals.
Government And Supermarkets Ignoring Health Threats

Supermarkets have not labelled these foods as containing GM residues and governments have made no attempt to enforce such a law. Even if they did, it is very doubtful that consumers would recognise the significance of this information; who is educating them of the dangers?

Industry and regulators often dismiss findings of toxicity in animal feeding trials on GMOs by claiming they are “not biologically significant” or “not biologically relevant”. However, these terms have never been properly defined in the context of animal feeding trials with GMOs and are scientifically meaningless.

Are consumers to act as the ultimate guinea-pigs, through unknowingly offering themselves as 'laboratory experiments' to provide hard evidence of possibly fatal sickness?

As with GM foods directly consumed by humans, the GM feeds being ingested by animals, whose residues pass through to humans, are simply one step further along the same chain. One is no 'safer' than the other. Recent studies have demonstrated that the immune system, kidneys, liver and reproductive organs are highly susceptible to even small doses of GMO. Recent research has revealed that there is no 'safe level'.
Irresponsible European Union

The European Food Standards Agency, which acts as main advisor to the European Council on food matters, has itself acknowledged the fact that rats fed Bt maize had significantly decreased kidney size as well as local inflammation. Also that GM maize-fed animals showed abnormal blood protein levels, indicative of disturbed liver metabolism. Yet the FSA went on to approve these products. This demonstrates a fundamental lack of responsibility.

The work carried out by Professor Seralini from the Caen laboratory in France, is the most thorough examination yet made on this issue. The deeply concerning results show massive tumours erupting in mice fed very low concentrations of GM maize based animal feed. Professor Seralini's tests also exposed the strong link that exists between GM feed toxicity and the glyphosate pesticide (Roundup) used in the on-farm growing of these plants.

The study was conducted over a two year period, while the GM industry's studies are typically carried out over a ninety day period. Far too short a time to cover the significant internal affects of GM residues on human cells and tissues.
Alarming New Evidence

Alarming evidence of the ubiquitous presence of the glyphosate pesticide in our food has been revealed by the discovery that large numbers of men and women already carry significant accumulations of this toxic chemical in their urine.

When put together, the dangers inherent in GM animal feed coupled with the glyphosate residues that are present in it, demonstrate an overwhelming case for a ban to be put in place at once. The burden of toxicity endured by both humans and animals has its limits. GM toxins building up inexorably in human tissues, could push natural immunity defences over this limit.

Governments have an absolute duty to act once made aware of a substantial danger to the citizens in their care. The 'precautionary principle' enshrined in the European Union's avowed position concerning imports of foods, has not been born out in practice. The EU and governments, have been found culpable of appeasing....