↓ Skip to main content

GM crops and the rat digestive tract: A critical review

Overview of attention for article published in Environment International, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
237 X users
facebook
43 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
12 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
133 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
GM crops and the rat digestive tract: A critical review
Published in
Environment International, September 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.envint.2014.08.018
Pubmed ID
Authors

I.M. Zdziarski, J.W. Edwards, J.A. Carman, J.I. Haynes

Abstract

The aim of this review is to examine the relationship between genetically modified (GM) crops and health, based on histopathological investigations of the digestive tract in rats. We reviewed published long-term feeding studies of crops containing one or more of three specific traits: herbicide tolerance via the EPSPS gene and insect resistance via cry1Ab or cry3Bb1 genes. These genes are commonly found in commercialised GM crops. Our search found 21 studies for nine (19%) out of the 47 crops approved for human and/or animal consumption. We could find no studies on the other 38 (81%) approved crops. Fourteen out of the 21 studies (67%) were general health assessments of the GM crop on rat health. Most of these studies (76%) were performed after the crop had been approved for human and/or animal consumption, with half of these being published at least nine years after approval. Our review also discovered an inconsistency in methodology and a lack of defined criteria for outcomes that would be considered toxicologically or pathologically significant. In addition, there was a lack of transparency in the methods and results, which made comparisons between the studies difficult. The evidence reviewed here demonstrates an incomplete picture regarding the toxicity (and safety) of GM products consumed by humans and animals. Therefore, each GM product should be assessed on merit, with appropriate studies performed to indicate the level of safety associated with them. Detailed guidelines should be developed which will allow for the generation of comparable and reproducible studies. This will establish a foundation for evidence-based guidelines, to better determine if GM food is safe for human and animal consumption.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 237 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 127 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 25 19%
Student > Master 24 18%
Researcher 18 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 14%
Student > Postgraduate 8 6%
Other 21 16%
Unknown 19 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 33%
Environmental Science 12 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 8%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Other 27 20%
Unknown 23 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 212. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 March 2023.
All research outputs
#186,927
of 25,756,911 outputs
Outputs from Environment International
#124
of 5,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,646
of 262,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environment International
#2
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,756,911 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,296 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,410 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.