Nutritional Content of GMOs

Dr. Michael Wald, author of his new book, Frankenfoods - Controversy, Lies & Your Health, offers a riveting perspective of the GMO predicament exploring governmental and industry cover-ups, health dangers, environmental threats, GMO-free food plans and recipes, nutritional supplements and other practical solutions.  Dr. Wald declares, "The GMO dilemma is here to stay and anyone interested in protecting their health and that of their loved ones, friends and the planet, must educate themselves and take political and personal action right now!"  Considering the importance of this information Dr. Wald asks that you re-tweet his GMO links and follow him on Twitter -  @DrMichaelWald. Thank you.

Dr. Michael Wald, Author of Frankenfoods and director of Longevity Services at Integrated Medicine of Mount Kisco.

Dr. Michael Wald, Author of Frankenfoods and director of Longevity Services at Integrated Medicine of Mount Kisco.

(Dr. Michael Wald, supervisor of Longevity Services at Integrated Medicine of Mt Kisco, can be reached at Integrated Medicine of Mount Kisco in Westchester, NY by calling 914-242-8844 (Ext. 1) or by emailing him at: info@intmedny.com).


Frankenfoods are not “nutritionally equivalent” and assays have shown them to have poor nutritional value compared to their non-GMO counterparts. To make matters worse, our fruit, vegetable and grain crops have undergone unprecedented drops in nutritional content over the last few decades. A recent study comparing dozens of “wild-type” variety plants, those grown in the wild to the same species of plants grown on industrial farms, proved that the nutritional content of wild variety plants was dozens to thousands of times higher. It has also been known for years that organic plants have superior nutrition content compared with non-organic plant foods. Not surprisingly, significant nutritional losses have been shown in GM plants as well. GMO nutritional studies are scant at best, but assays that have been done show real diminished nutritional content — not superior nutritional content as claimed by pro-GMO advocates. The combinations of non-organic foods, industrially farmed foods and nutritionally compromised GMOs have paved the way for greater disease and disability.

Pro-GMO advocates say repeatedly that GMOs do not differ substantially from their non-GMO counterparts in nutritional quality. This claim has no basis as comprehensive nutritional tests have not been performed, and tests that have been carried out cast doubt upon the nutritional quality of GMOs. Individuals who are truly concerned with public safety would never release foods to the public that are considered or proven to be nutritionally inadequate compared to foods already on the market. GMOs have not been studied adequately for nutritional content. The limited study that has been done clearly shows GMOs are substantially different from non-GMOs. Some of the reasons for the nutritional inadequacy of Frankenfoods are outlined below.

 

Phytates

A gene inserted into a plant could cause that plant to produce a high level of phytate, a common compound found in seeds and grains that binds with minerals and makes them unavailable to humans, and decreases the nutritional and mineral value of the plant. Claims are made by GMO advocates that the nutritional value of GMOs is not substantially different from non-GMOs, but I believe this claim to be misleading. Even if the nutritional content of Frankenfoods was equivalent to non-GMOs, the higher phytate content would bind to the minerals, converting those minerals into forms that the body either cannot absorb as efficiently or cannot absorb at all. Also, the fact that GMOs contain higher phytate content means that they are not nutritionally equivalent. The current evidence suggests that GMOs are deficient in several nutrients, and it is suspected that GMOs also contain unnaturally high levels of phytates.

 

Phytoestrogens — Anticancer Compounds

A study done by Anita Bakshi in 2003 showed that a strain of genetically modified soybeans produced lower levels of phytoestrogen compounds. These compounds are believed to protect against heart disease, several autoimmune diseases and cancer. Phytoestrogens belong to a large group of natural phenolic compounds, with the three largest classes being the coumestansprenylflavonoids and isoflavones. Phytoestrogens are not estrogen, but could act in the human body as weak estrogens or estrogen blockers, depending on what the body needs.

The accounts I have investigated regarding GMOs and lower concentrations of phytoestrogens are not precisely correct. GMOs seem to contain a reduced concentration of phytocompounds, not phytoestrogens. Phytocompounds are a large class of phyto- or plant compounds with many diverse, positive health benefits in the human body. Some of these phytocompounds can act as weak estrogens, progesterone and even testosterone. Others help tissues of the body heal from injury, or act as antioxidants, anti-cancer agents, immune regulators and detoxifiers. It is easy to predict that the reduced content of phytocompounds in our food supply will have a detrimental effect on the health of consumers, and at some point, maybe far into the future, manifesting as reduced quality and length of life.