purdue corn

Analysis: Purdue University GMO Study Based on Biased Data, Incorrect Findings

By On March 14, 2016
purdue corn

Purdue University released a study on GMOs critics are saying is biased and incorrect.

One of the most difficult things about the GMO controversy is that the picture is often clouded by the countless millions of dollars spent by the likes of Monsanto and Big Biotech on public relations in order to spin the story, and the data, in their favor.

Universities across America are being heavily influenced and/or bought out by Monsanto and other pro-GMO interests in a never-ending quest for more grant money, the pro-GMO Grocery Manufacturers’ Association was just busted in a huge money laundering scheme to stop mandatory GMO labeling, and it’s even been revealed that academics have been paid off to paint a rosy picture of GMOs in media articles.

Now a new study from Purdue University (which once researched the infamous “Terminator gene” GMO seeds) has released a study claiming that non-GMO crops will lead to lower yields and more land will be needed to grow our food.

Unfortunately for the GMO industry however, the findings are pulled from what one major watchdog organization is calling “seriously biased data,” a fact that the government paper the authors utilized in the study warned against according to this article from the Environmental Working Group.

It only compares the types of farms using GMOs to the types of farms using non-GMO crops; as such it does not compared how the seeds themselves affect yields. Growing GMOs is typically more expensive because the seeds can cost up to $150 more per bag, which is why many farmers are switching to non-GMO seeds (especially corn) this year.

The Purdue study doesn’t take into account that growers who purchase the expensive GM seeds may also spend more on irrigation, fertilizer and other management practices, the article notes. Also, a 2014 study used pulls data from farmers’ own responses to USDA surveys rather than objective statistical figures.

As noted in the article, previous studies have found that GMO crops have the same yields as non-GMO counterparts, and GMO seeds are showing to be the opposite of sustainable as the ongoing evolution of “superbugs” and “superweeds” resistant to glyphosate have been popping up.

Monsanto’s biggest response to this threat has been to create new chemical cocktails, sometimes based on herbicides and other chemicals that have previously been banned.

Meanwhile there is plenty of evidence that GMOs are not delivering where their parent companies say they are. A landmark 2013 UN report showed that small-scale organic and preferably biodynamic farming is the way to “feed the world,” not GMOs.

In addition, a 2009 report from the Union of Concerned Scientists titled ‘Failure to Yield’ found that “contrary to myths about the superiority of GE crop yields, most yield gains in recent years are due to traditional breeding or improvement of other agricultural practices.”

For more on what the EWG is calling a biased and flawed study, check out the article here.