So much for rational discussion. Until recently I had not seen evidence genetically-modified foods were safe to eat. My main gripe has been they add no benefit except for poor corporate citizens like Monsanto. GM scientists claim they offer food security.

Nope! Out best hope is in supporting independence of small, local farmers. Corporations undermine independence.

Now a new report from earthopensource.com has shifted my understanding about the safety of these foods. Two researchers concerned about the ethics of GM foods teamed together with an investigative reporter to produce this report. Here are a few key points from their conclusions.

GM foods cannot be considered safe to eat:

GM crops, including some that are already in our food and animal feed supply, have shown clear signs of toxicity in animal feeding trials – notably disturbances in liver and kidney function and immune responses.

GM foods encourage environmental abuse:

Most GM crops (over 75%) are engineered to tolerate applications of herbicides. Where such GM crops have been adopted, they have led to massive increases in herbicide use.

GM foods do not contribute to food security:

GM crops are often promoted as a “vital tool in the toolbox” to feed the world’s growing population, but many experts question the contribution they could make, as they do not offer higher yields or cope better with drought than non-GM crops. Most GM crops are engineered to tolerate herbicides or to contain a pesticide – traits that are irrelevant to feeding the hungry.

Other practices are safer, less expensive and more effective:

Conventionally bred, locally adapted crops, used in combination with agroecological farming practices, offer a proven, sustainable approach to ensuring global food security.

But read the whole report. Obviously GM foods are not the panacea some experts claim. Blaming environmental protesters for undermining food security is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. We need more voices uncovering the propaganda.