“Non-GMO foods are healthier.”
Strong confidence because major reviews and regulators find no health difference attributable to assessed GMO foods, and the label does not describe nutrient content at all. Direct head-to-head human outcome studies are scarce, but the claim is about a label, so they would add little.
A non-GMO label does not make a food healthier. It does not tell you how much fiber, protein, added sugar or sodium the food contains. Comparable GMO and non-GMO foods can both fit a healthy diet.
US bioengineered labeling does not make a claim about comparative health or safety. A food's nutrients depend on the product and variety, not a simple GMO versus non-GMO category.
Safety note: Non-GMO does not mean allergen-free or free of all pesticide use.
You can prefer non-GMO products without treating the label as a health requirement.
Compare the actual foods and nutrition labels, along with price and preferences.
Similar claims on GMO foods: safety, cancer, allergies, DNA and the non-GMO label
“GMO foods are unsafe to eat.”
FalseReviews of the research, including by the U.S. National Academies, find that GMO foods on the market are as safe to eat as their…
See the evidence“GMOs cause cancer.”
FalseEating assessed GMO foods has not been shown to cause cancer. Studies of the foods do not support the claim that changing a crop's genes…
See the evidence“GMO foods cause allergies.”
FalseAssessed GMO foods are not shown to be more allergy-causing than comparable non-GMO foods. A person with soy allergy still needs to avoid…
See the evidence“Eating GMO food changes your DNA.”
FalseEating GMO food does not turn its genes into your genes. Food DNA is largely broken down during digestion, just as it is from conventional…
See the evidenceJudge the food, not the label. GMO status alone is not a health signal in either direction.