Feature | Published:

GM soybeans and health safety—a controversy reexamined

Nature Biotechnology volume 25, pages 981987 (2007) | Download Citation


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rats and the survival and growth of their offspring has garnered widespread media and political attention but remains unpublished in the peer-reviewed literature.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.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.


  1. 1.

    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). <>

  2. 2.


  3. 3.


  4. 4.


  5. 5.


  6. 6.

    & Animal models impacted by phytoestrogens in commercial chow: implications for pathways influenced by hormones. Lab. Invest. 81, 735–747 (2001).

  7. 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. 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. 9.

    US Food and Drug Administration. FDA/CFSAN Redbook 2000 IV.C.9.a. Guidelines for Reproduction Studies. (FDA, Rockville, MD, 2006). <>

  10. 10.

    US Environmental Protection Agency. US EPA Series 870 Health Effects Test Guidelines. August 3, 2006 (EPA, Washington, DC, 2006). <>

  11. 11.

    US Environmental Protection Agency. Health Effects Test Guidelines, OPPTS 870.6200, Neurotoxicity Screening Battery. August 1998. <>

  12. 12.

    Housing, husbandry and handling of rodents for behavioral experiment. Nat. Protoc. 1, 936–946, 2006.

  13. 13.

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

  14. 14.

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

  15. 15.

    , & Compliance costs for regulatory approval of new biotech crops. Nat. Biotechnol. 25, 509–511 (2007).

  16. 16.

    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).

  17. 17.

    , , , & Nutritional assessment and fate of DNA of soybean meal from Roundup Ready or conventional soybeans using rats. Arch. Anim. Nutr. 58, 295–310 (2004).

  18. 18.

    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).

  19. 19.

    , , , & Soybean meal from Roundup Ready or conventional soybeans in diets for growing-finishing swine. J. Anim. Sci. 80, 708–715 (2002).

  20. 20.

    The Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes. ACNFP statement on the effect of GM soya on newborn rats. ACNFP <> (2005).

  21. 21.

    & 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).

  22. 22.

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

  23. 23.

    Genetically modified soy affects posterity: results of Russian scientists' studies. Regnum [online] published online 10 December 2005 <>.

  24. 24.

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

Download references

Author information


  1. Andrew Marshall is the Editor of Nature Biotechnology.

    • Andrew Marshall


  1. Search for Andrew Marshall in:

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/).

About this article

Publication history




Further reading

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