Van Eenennaam study marred by bias and scientific shortcomings

TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE:
http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15677-van-eenennaam-
study-marred-by-bias-and-scientific-shortcomings

Van Eenennaam study marred by bias and scientific shortcomings
on 03 October 2014.

12 of 17 relevant studies show potential negative health effects of GMOs

Thanks to GMO Free USA for sending us this perceptive review of the recently released Van Eenennaam and Young review of animal feeding studies, which is being widely touted as showing that GMOs are safe.

The authors, who wish to remain anonymous, find many scientific shortcomings in the review.

The reference numbers start at number 39 because this analysis is part of a larger document – however, the references listed at the end are consistent with the text.

A separate analysis of this study by Claire Robinson of GMWatch is here.

The Van Eenennaam and Young review abstract is available here. Citation: Eenennaam ALV, Young AE. Prevalence and impacts of genetically engineered feedstuffs on livestock populations. J. Anim. Sci. 2014:jas.2014-8124. doi:10.2527/jas.2014-8124.

EXCERPT: If we look at just the six month or longer feeding trials using GE varieties currently on the market, and look at actual health parameters and not carcass weight, milk production or other performance parameters, and using rodents and non-rodents comparable to humans (pigs, dogs), and our translations of the Russian studies are correct, we see twelve of the seventeen relevant long term studies suggest some potential negative effects for the GE fed animals compared to the controls.
---