GMO Corn: Dead, Deadly


Monsanto maintains that its genetically modified (GMO) corn is nutritionally equivalent to non-GMO corn. But a 2012 report, titled “2012 Nutritional Analysis: Comparison of GMO Corn versus Non-GMO Corn,” tells a different story.

A copy of the report was sent to Moms Across America by the Canadian non-GMO seed company De Dell Seed Company. In fact, it turns out that GMO corn is essentially nutritionally dead and laced with toxins in amounts that exceed those the Environmental Protection Agency deems “safe.”

Nutritionally, the study found that non-GMO corn is 20 times richer in nutrition, energy and protein compared to GMO corn. Non-GMO corn has more calcium, magnesium, manganese, potassium, iron and zinc.

According to the report, GMO corn contains 13 parts per million (ppm) of glyphosate, the active ingredient in the popular herbicide Roundup. According to the EPA, the maximum amount of glyphosate allowed in drinking water is 700 parts per billion, or .7 ppm. So GMO corn contains 18.5 times the “safe amount” as set by the EPA. Europe allows only .2 ppm of glyphosate.

GMO corn also contains 200 ppm of formaldehyde. According to the EPA:

Formaldehyde, a colorless, pungent-smelling gas, can cause watery eyes, burning sensations in the eyes and throat, nausea, and difficulty in breathing in some humans exposed at elevated levels (above 0.1 parts per million). High concentrations may trigger attacks in people with asthma. There is evidence that some people can develop a sensitivity to formaldehyde. It has also been shown to cause cancer in animals and may cause cancer in humans.  Health effects include eye, nose, and throat irritation; wheezing and coughing; fatigue; skin rash; severe allergic reactions. May cause cancer. May also cause other effects listed under “organic gases.”

According to one study, formaldehyde is toxic to animals in amounts of .97 ppm or more. So GMO corn contains 200 times the amount shown to be safe.

For tips on avoiding GMO foods, go here. You can also download a free non-GMO shopping guide here.

Hat tip:

Personal Liberty

Bob Livingston

founder of Personal Liberty Digest™, is an ultra-conservative American author and editor of The Bob Livingston Letter™, in circulation since 1969. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • CatGman

    This information is out there to be had. Corn is not the only GMO crop we should be concerned with. This is a prime example of why the USDA is a joke, and the joke is on us. They are supposed to be watching out for this kind of thing. After all, it wont kill us right away. Personally, I dont trust ANY entity of the government. Period.

  • milkman

    As a long time dairy producer who has feed samples analyzed regularly for 25 years and also has my commodity- milk one of the most tested and regulated food supplies in the country, I must say this is one of the most ill informed articles I have ever seen. As to the nutritional value of corn, there is no difference now than there was in the days before GMO. If anything is different corn today is better than non-GMO. As to the charge of contamination, if these numbers were true all animals and people consuming corn products would be ill or dead rather than healthier as proven by scientific studies.

    • Average Joe

      “As to the nutritional value of corn, there is no difference now than there was in the days before GMO.”

      ” If anything is different corn today is better than non-GMO.”

      Well, which is it? Both statements cannot possibly true…..

      Or could there even be a third possibility ( If anything is different … corn today is NOT better than non-GMO)?

      Where did you study to get your degree, since you obviously have one?

      I mean, you went into such intricate details about your vast knowledge on the subject of GMO’s. Bravo!!! (Sarcasm, in case you’re slow on the uptake)
      It is obvious from your comment that you didn’t read the links attached to the article… nor have you read anything else on the subject.

      If a “loafer” (such as yourself) makes a comment…and everybody laughs…

      Is it a comment…or just another absurd joke?
      If you believe that GMO food is hunky dory and nutritionally sound food, by all means eat until you drop…it has no effect on us. Please, enjoy your GMO’s and stop trying to blow smoke up our backsides with your silliness.


  • Guest

    Hey, the EPA can do what it did when Fukishema blew up: Just jack up the supposed ”safe limit” of everything, and voila, all is better! Ooops, the problem is, someone has to tell the human body of such ”changes”, and how it all better now to ingest such harmful crap in the food.

  • LogicalChemist

    A little chemistry lesson- gmo corn does not contain glyphosphate, unless the sample was contaminated by insecticide. The corn contains DNA genes that code for a couple specific enzymes that have a couple of changes made in their sequence so the enzymes aren’ t inactivated by Round Up(glyphosphate insecticide).

  • magmahombre

    This report raises several interesting issues and questions about the nutritonal value of glysophate resistant GMO corn, including: 1) Is the disastrously poor nutritional profile of the GMO corn due to the fact it is a Monsanto glysophate resistant GMO corn or due to the use of glysophate itself: In other word, would the same variety of GMO corn grown without glysophate have the same nutrionally poor profile? Glysophate is a powerful chelating agent that in and of itself. That means it chelates (binds to) many elements and likely ties them up, apparently so strongly, that plants cannot absorb them. Consequently, the same GMO corn grown without glysophate could have a somewhat normal nutritional profile. Of course, then what would be the point of using an expenseive, glysophate resistant GMO variety. Nonetheless the question still stands. 2) Glysophate resistant GMO corn isn’tt the only GMO corn variety on the market. There are also varities with the Bt toxin gene inserted. What nutritional profile to these GMO corn varieties have? There is still another problem with these since the Bt toxin gene does transfer to bacteria in the human gut which then produce Bt toxin for the rest of a person’s life. Bt toxin does have effects on humans.

  • flipped54

    I own a small business connecting buyers with sellers of farm machinery and equipment. I visited with a farmer who has a small herd of sheep and some pigs. He stated to me that when he fed GMO corn the animals would not eat the GMO corn. It would mold in the feeder and would have to be thrown away. He then requested to be supplied with non-GMO corn and the animals readily consume the corn and do not just walk away from the feeder and waste was negligible. This is not “scientific” but it is a legitimate observation by a livestock farmer.