Eyewitness Report: Animals Won’t Eat GMO’s

on January 4 | in Real Food | by | with 59 Comments

A Corny Story

Apparently I forgot a category in yesterday’s poll (which is still going on btw!) . . . “investigative journalism of controversial topics.” Thanks, Whittney! So here I am, reporting to you live from the potamus family living room, where just moments ago I looked outside and confirmed this groundbreaking, nutcracking story. Before you start shouting at your screen, I know I am not a journalist. Let’s have some fun, though. :)

The farmer grinned as he told the visitor, “Watch this!” He called his pigs, which ran frantically towards him to be fed. But when he scooped out corn and threw it on the ground, the pigs sniffed it and then looked up at the farmer with confused expectation. The farmer then scooped corn from another bin and flung it near the pigs, which ran over and quickly devoured it.

The farmer said, “The first corn is genetically engineered. They won’t touch it.”

Jeffrey M. Smith, author of Seeds of Deception, in an article for The Hippocrates Health Institute

When I first read this I thought “nice way to make a point!,” but I didn’t really believe it. I mean sure, every day there is more research indicating that genetically modified crops (GMO’s) cause infertility, infant mortality, immune dysfunction, allergies, accelerated aging, organ damage, stunted growth, and death¹. But surely the pigs didn’t figure it out before we did. Um, yeah . . . and it’s not just the pigs.

The Washington Post reported that laboratory mice, usually happy to munch on tomatoes, turned their noses up at the genetically modified FlavrSavr tomato. Scientist Roger Salquist said of his tomato, “I gotta tell you, you can be Chef Boyardee and mice are still not going to like them.” The mice were eventually force fed the tomato through gastric tubes and stomach washes. Several developed stomach lesions; seven of forty died within two weeks. The tomato was approved without further tests.

Between the Chapters: The Wisdom of Animals

Cows, pigs, elk, deer, raccoons, squirrels, rats, and mice all share the same aversion to GMO’s, says Smith. I had to see this for myself, so decided to experiment on our backyard squirrels.

Katie and I created a mini-snack bar on the fence by the pecan tree where the squirrels hang out. Our menu consisted of organic corn from Whole Foods and some “all natural” corn from Kroger.  GMO’s are dumped into our food supply without any labeling so I couldn’t be sure about the “all natural” corn, but since about 85% of the corn grown in the U.S. is GMO I thought it was pretty likely.

While we were filling the containers Katie tried to eat the Kroger corn and I totally flipped out. Protective much?

Snack bar open for business!!!

For the first couple of days I ran out every morning to see what was happening. Nada. Although the squirrels took a few polite nibbles, they didn’t seem interested so I pretty much forgot about it. Two months later I found this.

Thanks . . . But NO Thanks

Just a few kernels were left in the organic container, but after some curious nibbles the squirrels turned tail and ran from the GMO stuff. Although they wouldn’t comment, I think they read that study where the third generation of hamsters fed genetically engineered soy suffered slower growth, a high mortality rate, and a bizarre birth defect: fur growing in their mouths. Many also lost the ability to have pups, too. :(

Or maybe they picked out the roughly 15% that wasn’t genetically modified. Who knows??

Either way, I hope I’m not the only one that thinks we should take a hint from the Potamus family squirrels. If you’re not quite convinced, check out this video. I used to think the war was already lost, but I was wrong. We do not have to accept GMO’s as a fact of life. Although it takes a moment to get interesting, Jeff’s comments on the tipping point were surprisingly optimistic. Check it out!

For info on how to avoid GM foods, check out The Non-GMO Shopping Guide, especially the section on invisible GM ingredients.

Note: Thanks to a reader I learned after posting this that a smaller percentage of sweet corn grown in the U.S. is GMO than, say, field corn. I cannot say for sure that this corn was genetically modified.


Animals Don’t Want To Eat GMO’s, So Why Are We?

Top 10 Reasons To Label GMO Products

What you need to know about GMO’s

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
STANDARD FTC DISCLOSURE: In order for me to support my blogging activities, I may receive monetary compensation or other types of remuneration for my endorsement, recommendation, testimonial and/or link to any products or services from this blog. Please note that I only ever endorse products that are in alignment with Mommypotamus' ideals and that I believe would be of value to my readers.

related posts

59 Responses to Eyewitness Report: Animals Won’t Eat GMO’s

  1. Daniel says:

    I gotta say, I wasn’t expecting to see such a drastic difference in results. But I checked on the bins every now and then to see, and sure enough, the GMO corn was left relatively untouched.

    I will say that this little experiment which ANYONE can do packed enough punch that I am taking GMOs more seriously now.

  2. awesome topic. the truth doesn’t get much more obvious than this.

  3. Shari VV says:

    Wow, I wish I could say I’m surprised :( For years I’ve referred to regular grocery stores as crackhouses and that was long before I’d even heard of GMOs. Thanks for confirming my suspicions, I’ll continue to stay away from the iffy products at regular grocery stores.

  4. Alexis D says:

    What an awesome experiment to do on your own (with the help of your daughter)! I would never have thought to do this. Its quite sad that people can go to Kroger and buy the frozen veggies thinking that they are doing good by eating their veggies but (most times) unknowingly be eating GMO’s and people wonder why their health is in such a bad state and/or cant get pregnant!

    I will be passing the link to this post on to my friends & family via email to show them how animals wont eat GMOs so we shouldnt either! Thanks!

    • Heather says:

      SO true, Alexis! It’s the new year and people are all about making changes to improve their health. Thanks for sharing this post so that their efforts aren’t wasted on dangerous GMO’s.

  5. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Heather Dessinger, Pat Recordon. Pat Recordon said: RT @bouche_pleine: Une très amusante histoire d'écureuils refusant de manger du maïs OGM http://ow.ly/3y15h (via Amélie Lachapelle) [...]

  6. brad says:

    This was very interesting! Thanks for sharing.

  7. Whittney says:

    I think I’ll pick up some Walmart brand corn today and do my own squirrel buffet experiment!

  8. margo says:

    My other vote would be for: investigative journalism of controversial topics. Great experiment. I learn so much here. Can I share this on my FB page? Thanks for taking the time to investigate and report!

  9. Joanna Moore says:

    wow, even after reading the thing about the pigs, my jaw dropped when i saw your (mostly) empty organic tub and (mostly) full gmo tub. amazing! thanks for this info heather =)

  10. Danielle L. says:

    wow. this inspired me to do an impromptu pantry/freezer/fridge cleaning! the results were surprising, but for the most part my previous label checking has seemed to help. i do have a question though: i do a lot of baking and was wondering what you recommend as a GMO free baking powder substitute?

    • Heather says:

      We use Bob’s Red Mill baking powder. They don’t use any GMO ingredients in their products. Anything you find at Whole Foods (if there is one near you) should be GMO-free.

      • Danielle L. says:

        Thanks Mommypotamus! I normally shop (i buy seasonally/local/whole foods) at Sprouts, and I’m wondering if there is any difference between the quality of products they sell & Whole Foods products? Also how do we know FOR SURE which fresh produce is GMO free? I know the guide said fresh is usually ok, (besides the papaya& crookneck squash) but is there any alternative besides buying all organic? How do you shop? (There’s an idea for a future post..just sayin’ lol)

        • Heather says:

          Whole Foods has made a commitment not to source any GMO products. To my knowledge Sprouts has not.

          I thought I was going to have a loophole for you but it turns out I was wrong. You see, organic produce is labeled with a 9 in front of the description code. 8 in front of the description is supposed to designate genetically modified produce, but it’s OPTIONAL. And since (duh!) most consumers won’t knowingly buy GMO’s, the producers have opted not to label their products (you can read more at http://www.foodrenegade.com/plu-codes-dont-indicate-gmo-produce/).

          The only solution I know of for sure is to buy organic or at least to avoid these products http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/BuyingNon-GMO/index.cfm

          • Danielle L. says:

            Thank you so much for taking the extra time to look into that! Your information was very helpful & just what I needed to make the complete transition to Organic. Having the proper resources makes the transition much easier. Thanks again! :)

  11. Hunter says:

    I’m amazed. I just watched Food Inc last night and had started thinking about GMOs, but this made it very real. Even my husband, who usually doesn’t respond to my food research, was impacted… Time to clean out the pantry!

  12. shannon says:

    what was floating in the uneaten container? Just curious. :) Very interesting. I think I’ll have to try this myself! :) Where do you find the organic one for sure? I would have guessed the “all natural” meant just that. :)

  13. shannon says:

    thanks. i guess i’ll read those “labels” closer from now on! :)

  14. This is amazing! I just wrote a post about avoiding GMO’s and am linking to this “Eyewitness Report.” (Posted on facebook too). We need to keep posting about GMO’s – it’s all about the tipping point!

  15. Jennifer R. says:

    sounds like a great science project — my kids would love this.
    I’m actually thankful one of my kids is allergic to corn, so we avoid it always :)

  16. I absolutely loved this. It’s incredible — but when you think about it, it really makes sense.

    I only wish we humans were as smart as animals.

    Thanks so much for sharing – I just posted it on Facebook.

  17. Hi all, I am a plant scientist who studies genes in corn that make sweet corn taste sweet.
    Here is a really important question: How do you know that the yellow corn is genetically engineered? A side by side comparison of two corns to see if animals will eat them sounds fine, but in order to make conclusions from it you need to be sure that you know what the differences are between the two bins. While you are correct that about 85% of field corn is genetically engineered, you were probably not aware that most of the sweet corn grown in the US is NOT genetically engineered. The corn that is grown en masse for animals, processing, and corn chips is field corn – that is, corn that is grown as a grain. Sweet corn, however, is a special type of corn that accumulates sugar because it does not make starch properly. There is only one variety of sweet corn that has had a GE trait bred into it (by crossing it with GE field corn) and it is not widely grown, as far as I know. It is very unlikely that your yellow non-organic sweet corn is genetically engineered. The same thing goes for popcorn – there are no GE popcorn varieties to my knowledge.

    There are some obvious differences between the two frozen sweet corns that you have there. The first is the color, which is indicative of two things. First, yellow color in corn is caused by carotenoids (think the orange of carrots and the red of watermelons and tomatoes) and these are connected to flavors – so on that basis alone you could expect a difference in taste. Second, some of the genes that make some varieties of sweet corn much sweeter can also be linked to color. The gene that I am studying for my doctoral thesis, called Sugary Enhancer, makes sweet corn extra sweet (and creamy) and is also associated with a lighter color. In short, the organic white corn may be a different variety that is sweeter than the variety used for the conventional yellow corn in your experiment. This is much more likely to explain the results of your experiment.
    Science is fun and can be easy to do, but in order to make conclusions off of an experiment. In order to conclude that genetic engineering has made sweet or field corn unpalatable for animals, it would have to be genetically similar varieties of corn with the difference being the presence or absence of the GE trait. With the same amount of corn in each bin, and repeated with the bins switched left-right each day to make sure that the squirrels aren’t just eating out of the bin on the left. Is it easier for the squirrels to reach the left side than the right?
    Non-human animals do not possess a sixth sense or even an intuition that genetic engineering alters food in a negative way. Instead, they possess tongues with taste buds that help them choose what to eat, just like we do.
    Finally, here’s food for thought – of all the anecdotes that are made about animals avoiding GE corn or soy, etc, keep in mind that a huge amount of corn and soy becomes animal feed, with no apparent rejection at all.

    • Heather says:

      Karl – According to this document on Seeds of Deception people who consumed sweet corn in the U.S. are indeed at risk of being exposed to GMO’s. “At risk ingredients include corn chips and tortiillas, tofu, soy sauce and sweet corn.” Of course, since labeling isn’t required I cannot say for sure and I find that very frustrating.

      The bottom line is this: both varieties were labeled sweet corn. They may have been slightly different in sweetness but kids like cake and ice cream and don’t turn one down just because it is not quite as sweet as the other. Access to each bin was identical. At the very least I think this experiment may demonstrate a preference for organically grown products over those that are grown using pesticides and herbicides. At least, that’s one possible explanation.

      Regarding your statement “Finally, here’s food for thought – of all the anecdotes that are made about animals avoiding GE corn or soy, etc, keep in mind that a huge amount of corn and soy becomes animal feed, with no apparent rejection at all.” I disagree. Here’s a sad fact: If I were given the option to eat GMO’s or starve I would eat GMO’s. I think animals are being given the same choice. Cows were meant to eat grass, not corn. However, they’re not given that option in CAFO’s, so they take what they’re given. I believe that if they were offered just about any other option (grass or organically grown grain) they would choose it over the GMO.

      Regarding your opinion that “Non-human animals do not possess a sixth sense or even an intuition that genetic engineering alters food in a negative way. Instead, they possess tongues with taste buds that help them choose what to eat, just like we do,” I disagree. I don’t think it is some mysterious sixth-sense that inhibits them from selecting GMO’s. Rather, I believe animals have a finely-honed ability to identify what is toxic and what is not . . . it’s how they survive. Genetically modified plants have two basic functions, to produce poison (to prevent insects from eating them) or to drink poison (allowing farmers to spray deadly pesticides that kill everything in sight other than the Roundup ready GMO’s). The bottom line of both of these approaches is POISON. The effects on animals and humans have not been thoroughly studied (which is negligent on the part of Monsanto and other GMO producing firms). However, initial research is indicating that these products DO CAUSE HARM, that is why many scientists have written an open letter, saying in part:

      “We urge the US Congress to reject GM crops as both hazardous and contrary to the interest of family farmers; and to support research and development of sustainable agricultural methods that can truly benefit family farmers all over the world.

      We, the undersigned scientists, call for the immediate suspension of all environmental releases of GM crops and products, both commercially and in open field trials, for at least 5 years; for patents on living processes, organisms, seeds, cell lines and genes to be revoked and banned; and for a comprehensive public enquiry into the future of agriculture and food security for all.” (http://www.i-sis.org.uk/list.php)

      • “At the very least I think this experiment may demonstrate a preference for organically grown products over those that are grown using pesticides and herbicides.” Right, but the title of your post and the conclusions you made for yourself and other people was that it was due to genetic engineering.
        “I believe that if they were offered just about any other option (grass or organically grown grain) they would choose it over the GMO.” A testable hypothesis, but from my experience raising sheep I can tell you that livestock like to eat grain along with grass. They stopped eating grass and came running when we brought out the grain, and it was not organic. The problem is, you are assuming that these animals would follow your desires for them and not their own. Animals certainly do turn down one food because it is not as sweet as the other. Honeybees, for example, will seek out the sweetest nectar, and ignore flowers that aren’t as highly concentrated. Sugar added to foods makes them more attractive to rodents, people, and everything in between. Try offering some less-sweet ice cream next to a really sweet one and see what the kids would rather eat.

        All of these are potential explanations that should be considered as likelier explanations than genetic engineering, especially since you have no idea if the sweet corn is in fact genetically engineered. And as I explained, Bt sweet corn is not currently common.

        As for safety, on Biofortifed.org, an independent site I co-manage, we maintain a list of studies related to the safety of genetically engineered crops, and our list has about 300 studies, 1/3 of them are completely independently-funded:
        We’re working on a way to make the results more easily accessible because people like Jeffrey Smith work very hard to make people believe that this research does not exist, or is all funded by the companies that make the GE crops. Jeffrey Smith, by the way, is paid to advertise for the non-GE food companies that he promotes. That is a conflict of interest that should be kept in mind when listening to him with regard to food choices. I also doubt that the ‘tipping point’ that he describes will happen. He is involved in creating a niche market – labeled non-GE foods at a premium price, and that will likely not affect the large companies that are not involved in this niche. A Midwestern bread company tried out a line of “non-GMO” bread labeled as such on the front of the label, and they discontinued it because no one cared enough to buy it.

        As for the “poisons” issue, Bt is very specific about the insects that it kills. It’s not like bug spray and arsenic and stuff like that – it is a protein that attaches to specific receptors in the guts of certain insects. Some only affect caterpillars, some only beetles, etc. Like chocolate is poisonous for dogs but not for us, so too is Bt safe for humans and not for moths that try to munch on corn. There has been a lot of research on this stuff.

        There are also GE crops that have nothing to do with herbicides or killing insects, there is virus-resistant squash and papaya that merely blocks viruses that attack the plant from spreading. Soon there may also be a virus-resistant plum made by the USDA.

        With regard to the statement you linked to, it depends on research by Arpad Pusztai, which has been roundly criticized, here is a link to some info on another independent site, Academics Review: http://academicsreview.org/reviewed-content/genetic-roulette/section-1/1-1%E2%80%94pusztai%E2%80%99s-flawed-claims/ Pusztai also made the mistake of going to the media before carefully confirming his results. Indeed, the hamster experiment you mention is another ‘study’ that Smith has promoted that has never been published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. Phantom studies only reported by Jeffrey Smith are not a good basis for making decisions. He is the sole source for information on this ‘study.’

        Granted, you may not like the idea of genetic engineering and would like to avoid it yourself. But claiming that this experiment demonstrates that it is both unsafe and that animals avoid it, when there is a lot of published research to the contrary is mistaken.

        • Heather says:

          “Right, but the title of your post and the conclusions you made for yourself and other people was that it was due to genetic engineering.”

          My conclusions were my own and I shared all the facts as I understood them to allow others to draw theirs.

          “The problem is, you are assuming that these animals would follow your desires for them and not their own.”

          No, I am simply assuming that ruminants such as cows are more likely to select grass as their primary food source.

          “As for safety, on Biofortifed.org, an independent site I co-manage, we maintain a list of studies related to the safety of genetically engineered crops, and our list has about 300 studies, 1/3 of them are completely independently-funded:”

          While there is research on both side, I think the research indicating they are harmful (http://www.realfooddigest.com/2011/01/how-to-avoid-dangerous-genetically-modified-foods/) is overwhelming. “Not harmful” can be construed to mean many different things. In vaccines, “effectiveness” can mean that the government saved money treating that particular disease even though MORE people got sick with it (I can provide a ref if you want it but it will take a few days). That is not what “effective” means to the public, and I imagine “safe” may not mean what they assume, either. The fact that many scientists are calling for a worldwide ban on GMO’s (http://www.i-sis.org.uk/list.php) should be heeded.

          “As for the “poisons” issue, Bt is very specific about the insects that it kills. It’s not like bug spray and arsenic and stuff like that – it is a protein that attaches to specific receptors in the guts of certain insects. Some only affect caterpillars, some only beetles, etc. Like chocolate is poisonous for dogs but not for us, so too is Bt safe for humans and not for moths that try to munch on corn. There has been a lot of research on this stuff.”

          I’d like to borrow the words of a commentor on a recent Yale article. “Just like the transgenes in GMOs can’t cross to other organisms?…Experts assured us that it was impossible & we’d all look like plants by now if it could happen. But they removed the protective mechanisms that normally prevent transfer of genetic material in the gene insertion process, and sure enough we find “round-up ready” herbicide tolerant bacteria in human digestive tracts, and in landfills. Oops!” http://e360.yale.edu/feature/as_pharmaceutical_use_soars_drugs_taint_water_and_wildlife/2263/

          “claiming that this experiment demonstrates that it is both unsafe and that animals avoid it, when there is a lot of published research to the contrary is mistaken.”

          Again, I said in the original post that I couldn’t be sure the “All-Natural” corn was GMO. I assumed it was and that may have been incorrect. However, my little experiment is not the reason I believe GMO’s are dangerous. My reasons are many and varied, but basically come down to the fact that I don’t believe Monsanto has been honest with the public about their products (http://www.psrast.org/ecologmons.htm). I believe that they have manipulated the approval process via the revolving door between their company and government positions (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Labeling_Issues%2C_Revolving_Doors%2C_rBGH%2C_Bribery_and_Monsanto#Revolving_Doors), and most importantly GMO’s have not been around long enough to determine the long term implications of their use. Considering the fact that they have not increased crop yields as promised, there is absolutely no reason they should be released into the environment. Should we (as I expect) come to believe they are harmful we will not be able to get them back.

      • kris says:

        WELL SAID …. animals know how do you think dogs can sniff out cancers ???
        Thanks for letting me visit keep up the good work : )
        cheers from OZ

  18. It’s true! Last year we grew two varieties of heirloom dent corn, Bloody Baron and Oaxacan Green along with a row or two plain yellow corn that we had left over from the feed store. (We just wanted to see if the feed store corn would actually grow.) It all did. The local deer devoured all of our heirloom corn and left us only the crappy yellow. We were stunned. What a lesson! If animals don’t want to put it into their own bodies, we shouldn’t either.

  19. Joanna moore says:

    Karl- actually, I called Orville Redenbacher last year and was informed that the corn they use for their popcorn is produced with Biotech which if I understand correctly, is Monsanto’s form of GM.

  20. Alexis says:

    Speaking of GMO’s, as I was ordering more FCLO from Green Pasture tonight I came across this article on their website http://www.greenpasture.org/community/?q=node/337 – talks about farmers in India who were promised from Monsanto that growing GM crap, I mean crop, would make them more profit when in the end most farmers lost everything and Monsanto is to blame for the high suicide rate in Indian farmers – sad!

    • Heather says:

      It’s heartbreaking and totally unnecessary.

    • kris says:

      great news India has given GM the thumbs down ….. google it sorry have forgotten where l saw that OH thast right on our facebook page- Australians want GM FREE food : )
      This l think is the start of more good news, once the ball starts rolling it wont stop YEAH : )
      Not trying to plug our page but we are trying to help organise a WORLD WIDE RALLY to coincide with word food day in OCT 2011 Write to anyone you know who wants to fight the good fight and do the same thing 16th Oct and we will all walk together and stop this … sorry didnt come here to do this but am a bit hyped tonight ( happy)

  21. Tamar says:

    The very telling and damning indictment on GMO’s is the fact that Monsanto and other companies heavily invested in GMO technology fight tooth and nail against any requirements by the government to label the foods as GMO. If their products are so awesome, they should be proud to label them as GMO. The fact they want to hide it is their shame.

  22. Rachael says:

    I’ve researched a lot on this subject of GMO’s and it just doesn’t stop AMAZING ME that some human beings can be so short-sighted and downright greedy. Read my post that touches on the subject of the FDA and the GMO connection. Included is a video of a segment Dr. Oz discussed the subject. http://urbangardensolutions.wordpress.com/2010/12/11/should-the-fda-have-more-power-over-our-food-system/

  23. BeckyK says:

    Wow! I happened to find your site while I was researching 3-day potty training. I LOVE your blog and this article has fascinated me. I’ve never heard of this and I was shocked to learn about GMO’s. I was so upset to read that the “all natural” bag of veggies aren’t really what they seem. I’ve thought I’ve been making good choices by purchasing those same “all natural” labeled bags! Thanks for the info! I’ve shared it with my family & friends and will be doing a lot more to find out how I can do better at feeding my family.

    • Heather says:

      It’s great to “meet” you, Becky! I’m guessing by your potty training search that you have a little one at home. This is a WONDERFUL community for moms with young kids. I write the posts, but the comments are where it’s at! :) I’m so glad you joined the conversation and I hope you stick around!

  24. Heather,

    If the pigs won’t eat genetically altered corn do you think we should be eating it?

  25. Hi all, I contacted Monsanto to ask them if they sell genetically engineered popcorn anywhere, and the answer is no. Their biggest competitor for the corn market is Pioneer, but I suspect that it will be the same answer. Popcorn is a small market and it actually has genetic barriers to crossing with other corns – bred into it intentionally to keep non-popcorn pollen grains from making the popcorn less pop-able.

    Kathleen at Monsanto asked around amongst their corn folks and they all confirmed that there is no GE popcorn. Even the anti-GE law firm, The Center for Food Safety, states that there is no GE popcorn in their shopper’s guide. (just search for popcorn in it)
    So hey, maybe I might have some idea what I’m talking about? :)

    With regard to pigs avoiding GE foods, again we’re talking about anecdotal evidence versus carefully controlled experiments. I’m all for homespun science, in fact I have done and publicized some myself with bees and aerial pesticide sprays, but as with all science, you are limited in what conclusions you can draw based upon how well you conduct the experiment.

    “Considering the fact that they have not increased crop yields as promised” This is not true, GE had increased crop yields in the case of Bt corn and cotton, for instance. (Not to mention saving the Hawaiian papaya industry) A widely-publicized non-peer-reviewed report, called Failure to Yield, is often cited in support of this claim. But if you read the report, it actually claims that GE crops have indeed increased total corn yields by 3-4%. Not bad when you consider that this is an overall yield increase carried by only about 2/3 acreage of the trait in the US. The sticking point in your statement is “as promised” – could you tell me exactly how much of a yield increase was promised? And if someone promised 10% but it turned out to be 5% does that mean that the yield increase should be ignored because it was ‘not enough?’

    Additionally, Bt corn has been helping out non-GE corn growers, including organic corn crops, by suppressing the corn borer pest across the midwest. A recent peer-reviewed study found that this ‘neighbor effect’ was benefiting even the non-GE corn growers with a 3% boost. Here is a link to a blog post on Biofortified discussing this research:

    Finally, on issues of safety, you may already be convinced that GE is too risky, but how reliable are the sources that form the basis for your opinion? Did you read any of the linked studies in the page link I posted? http://www.biofortified.org/genera/studies-for-genera/ I just added another one today at the bottom of the list. The link you posted, where you indicated that the evidence was ‘overwhelming’ is a common, repeated list assembled by Jeffrey Smith, who is not a scientist nor an expert in food safety or animal or human health. It seems like an impressive list, but his beliefs are based on misunderstandings of the research and distortions, both accidental and perhaps intentional. A couple professors put together an independent website that debunks Smith’s claims: http://www.academicsreview.org. Click on a few random ones in the list of 65 claims to see what I mean. Finally, while the genetic engineering companies do have a financial interest in claiming GE crops are safe (perhaps even if they are not), people like Smith have a financial interest in claiming that they are not safe even if they are. They direct readers to buy products from their shopping guides, which are paid for by ads from the food companies that are advertised in them. Smith boasts about traveling for 50% of the year or more – the money for this comes from somewhere. Everyone’s got to make a living, but if Smith finds out he was wrong all along, would you trust him to reveal that fact to his readers, or continue with business as usual?

    • kris says:

      wow why do scientists find it so hard to think they are not all mighty all powerful and have ALL the answers ??? ANY testing that shows up problems is a problem ! Then to put it out on the market to test on humans is wrong ! Ask the 100.000 widows in India that now have to try and work the farm and raise the kids with out help all the while trying to pay off their Monsanto debt?
      The ground is poisoned and so are the streams! COMMON SENSE tells you that if you put poison into food it will damage what ever it touches OH no wait a minute … remember when DDT was safe …. I think science tells us that they dont know what they are doing playing with the genetic structure of a plant or animal !!! oh give me a break Karl

  26. Rochelle says:

    @Karl Why are you supporting a company that created agent orange and has lied to the country about what it is doing?!?! If GMO’s were so great why not label them?!?! There is no benefit to the consumer. Jeffery Smith is doing what other countries have openly done, Informing the public!

  27. Ken Roseboro says:

    I publish a monthly magazine called The Organic & Non-GMO Report, http://www.non-gmoreport.com.
    I enjoyed your article, and think your “experiment” indicates that the squirrels prefer the organic corn.
    There was an article in the NY Times a few years ago where scientists tested a similar theory with crackers made from organic wheat and conventional wheat and found that mice preferred the organic crackers.
    I agree with Karl that the “natural” sweet corn may not be GM since I’m also not aware that GM sweet corn is widely grown. But it could be that the GM sweet corn was cross pollinated by GM field corn and contains transgenes. But only a GMO test could verify that.
    Someone from a seed company contacted me a few years about a similar experiment they did, which I wrote an article about, which you can see here:

  28. Do you know what a GMO is? | WorryFreeMom says:

    [...] more info, here are some other websites:http://www.mommypotamus.com/eyewitness-report-animals-wont-eat-gmos/ (a fun blog about a mom who did an experiment with her [...]

  29. [...] Eyewitness Report: Animals Won’t Eat GMO’s [...]

  30. [...] Eyewitness Report: Animals Won’t Eat GMO’s [...]

  31. [...] Eyewitness Report: Animals Won’t Eat GMO’s – The Mommypotamus [...]

  32. Steph says:

    Someone I work with who has worked in the food industry (ADM) says that the reason animals won’t eat GMO corn is because of the strange sequences of DNA that the scientists put on either side of the gene that is spliced into the rest of the DNA in order to “mark” where it is. She says that the “markers” do not necessarily get coded into a protein. (There has to be a sequence in front for the RNA transcriptase to “stand on” and a “end” code at the end of a gene, I think. But I’m not a scientist. The markers–weird sequences of DNA–are probably combinations of the bases not often seen in nature–in order to make them easily detected so the scientists can see where the spliced-in gene is.) Animals apparently do not like these DNA markers, which is why they won’t eat it. I don’t know if this is exactly proof that GMO food is unhealthy, but I do think it’s a very bad sign.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

« »