Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Feature
  • Published:

GM soybeans and health safety—a controversy reexamined

Nature Biotechnology volume 25, pages 981–987 (2007)Cite this article

An unprecedented study claiming that transgenic soybeans compromise the fertility of rats and the survival and growth of their offspring has garnered widespread media and political attention but remains unpublished in the peer-reviewed literature. Here, an account of the work from the principal investigator, Irina Ermakova, is appended with comments from researchers in the field.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Ermakova, I.V. Influence of genetically modified soya on the birth-weight and survival of rat pups. in Proceedings of the Conference Epigenetics, Transgenic Plants and Risk Assessment, Frankfort am Main, Germany, December 1, 2005 (ed. Moch, K.) 41–48 (Öko-Institut, Freiburg, 2006). <http://www.oeko.de/files/forschungsergebnisse/application/octet-stream/download.php?id=277>

    Google Scholar 

  2. <http://www.responsibletechnology.org/utility/showArticle/?objectID=296>

  3. <http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/PARLMENT/hansArt.nsf/V3Key/LC20051109040>

  4. <http://www.oecd.org/document/63/0,2340,en_2649_34381_2346175_1_1_1_1,00.html>

  5. <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/etc/medialib/efsa/science/gmo/gmo_meetings/1237.Par.0002.File.dat/gmo_minutes_23rd_plenmeet1.pdf>

  6. Brown, N.M. & Setchell, K.D.R. Animal models impacted by phytoestrogens in commercial chow: implications for pathways influenced by hormones. Lab. Invest. 81, 735–747 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. OECD Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals. Repeated Dose 90-Day Oral Toxicity Studies in Rodents. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. OECD Test Guideline No. 408. Adopted 21st September 1998. (OECD, Paris, 1998).

  8. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. OECD Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals. One Generation Reproduction Toxicity Study. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. OECD Test Guideline No. 415. Adopted 26th May 1983. (OECD, Paris, 1983).

  9. US Food and Drug Administration. FDA/CFSAN Redbook 2000 IV.C.9.a. Guidelines for Reproduction Studies. (FDA, Rockville, MD, 2006). <http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~redbook/red-toca.html>

  10. US Environmental Protection Agency. US EPA Series 870 Health Effects Test Guidelines. August 3, 2006 (EPA, Washington, DC, 2006). <http://www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/publications/OPPTS_Harmonized/870_Health_Effects_Test_Guidelines/Series/>

  11. US Environmental Protection Agency. Health Effects Test Guidelines, OPPTS 870.6200, Neurotoxicity Screening Battery. August 1998. <http://www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/publications/OPPTS_Harmonized/870_Health_Effects_Test_Guidelines/Series/870-6200.pdf>

  12. Deacon, R.M.J. Housing, husbandry and handling of rodents for behavioral experiment. Nat. Protoc. 1, 936–946, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Brake, D.G. & Evenson D.P. A generational study of glyphosate-tolerant soybeans on mouse fetal, postnatal, pubertal and adult testicular development. Food Chem. Toxicol. 42, 29–36 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Aoyama, H. et al. A two generational reproductive toxicology study of 2,4-dichlorophenol in rats. J. Toxicol. Sci. 30, 59–78 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kalaitzandonakes, N., Alston, J.M. & Bradford, K.J. Compliance costs for regulatory approval of new biotech crops. Nat. Biotechnol. 25, 509–511 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Teshima, R. et al. Effect of GM and non-GM soybeans on the immune system of BN rats and B10A mice. J. Food Hyg. Soc. Japan. 41, 188–193 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhu, Y., Li, D., Wang, F., Yin, J. & Jin, H. Nutritional assessment and fate of DNA of soybean meal from Roundup Ready or conventional soybeans using rats. Arch. Anim. Nutr. 58, 295–310 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Hammond, B. et al. The feeding value of soybeans fed to rats, chickens, catfish and dairy cattle is not altered by genetic incorporation of glyphosate tolerance. J. Nutr. 126, 717–727 (1996).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Cromwell, G.L., Lindemann, M.D., Randolph, H.H., Stanisiewski, E.P. & Hartnell. G.F. Soybean meal from Roundup Ready or conventional soybeans in diets for growing-finishing swine. J. Anim. Sci. 80, 708–715 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. The Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes. ACNFP statement on the effect of GM soya on newborn rats. ACNFP <http://www.acnfp.gov.uk/acnfppapers/gmissues/acnfpgmsoya> (2005).

  21. Beever, D. & Kemp, C. Safety issues associated with the DNA in animal feed derived from genetically modified crops. A review of scientific and regulatory procedures. Nutr. Abstr. Revs. Series B: Livest. Feeds Feed. 70, 175–182 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Jonas, D.A. et al. Safety considerations of DNA in food. Ann. Nutr. Metab. 45, 235–254 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Genetically modified soy affects posterity: results of Russian scientists' studies. Regnum [online] published online 10 December 2005 <http://www.regnum.ru/english/526651.html>.

  24. Stewart, C.N. Press before paper—when media and science collide. Nat. Biotechnol. 21, 353–354 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Andrew Marshall is the Editor of Nature Biotechnology.,

    Andrew Marshall

Authors
  1. Andrew Marshall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

Vivian Moses notes he is the Chairman of CropGen (London), an information service directed at informing the UK public about agricultural biotechnology, which receives limited support from the biotech industry but acts entirely independently (http://www.cropgen.org/).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Marshall, A. GM soybeans and health safety—a controversy reexamined. Nat Biotechnol 25, 981–987 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0907-981

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0907-981

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing