Edit: Nope. I got some of the facts wrong, so the below is mostly hooey, in substance if not in conclusions. Read the Reddit post that saurik links, it's muc

Edit: Nope. I got some of the facts wrong, so the below is mostly hooey, in substance if not in conclusions. Read the Reddit post that saurik links, it's much higher quality. --- Misleading title is misleading. What the article's describing is not a study that's looking for toxicity in GM food. It's a study that's looking for toxicity in Roundup, delivered in both drinking water and on food. The food does happen to be a Roundup-resistant variety of maize. But there weren't any study groups for non-GM maize with similar levels of the agent, nor do there seem to have been any study groups for resistant maize grown without Roundup. So the effects of the agent and the maize that's been engineered to resist it have not been isolated from each other, meaning that the study doesn't actually provide any data to address the question of whether "GM Maize Can Cause Tumors." However, there were groups that were given Roundup in the water but no GM maize. Which is suggestive - it suggests that this study was never designed to study whether "GM maize can cause tumors." It was testing Roundup, and the maize was only being included in the study because Roundup-resistant maize is obviously a good way for Roundup to enter a person's diet.