Are GMOs Responsible For Your Gluten Intolerance?

Gluten, a protein found in wheat and other grains, has been linked to everything from gas and bloating to celiac disease, a serious autoimmune condition that can increase risk of death.

Some estimate that around 18 million Americans suffer from some sort of gluten-intolerance, and while genetics certainly account for some, it simply can’t explain all of these new cases. In searching for the answer, some have pointed to genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) as the potential culprit. Introduced en masse into the American food supply around the mid-1990s, GMOs have had just enough time to overwhelm our systems, and some medical experts believe we’re reaping the consequences.

Staple GMOs (soy, corn, cotton (oil), canola (oil), sugar from sugar beets, zucchini, yellow squash, Hawaiian papaya, and alfalfa) have been infused with Monsanto’s favorite weed killer, Roundup. This herbicide’s active ingredient is glyphosate, a chemical that has recently been linked to health conditions that may initiate or exacerbate gluten-related disorders.

In essence, eating genetically modified and engineered foods subjects us to chemicals meant to kill pests and fungi. It should come as no surprise that when ingested, these substances, like glyphosate and Bt-toxin, continue to kill–only they’re attacking our gut flora, digestive enzymes and immune systems.

I know lots of people who think the gluten-free trend is just another fad diet, destined to fall by the wayside like Atkins. But it’s hard to argue with the scores of people who’ve suffered from chronic conditions for years, only to find relief when they finally eliminate gluten.

Now it would seem that eliminating GMOs in addition to the gluten could actually amplify the healing process. “Based on my clinical experience, when I remove genetically modified foods as part of the treatment for gluten sensitivity, recovery is faster and more complete. I believe that GMOs in our diet contribute to the rise in gluten sensitivity in the U.S. population,” internist, Emily Linder MD told the Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT).

The only problem is, thanks to Monsanto and a government that refuses to label GMOs, it’s nearly impossible to identify a genetically-modified ingredient.

According to IRT, The best way to avoid GMOs is to consult the or download the free iPhone app ShopNoGMO. Look for products with either the “Non-GMO Project Verified” or the “Certified Organic” seal. And avoid ingredients derived from the foods most likely to be genetically modified. These include soy, corn, cottonseed, canola, sugar, papaya from Hawaii or China, zucchini, and yellow squash.

Ask Congress to start labeling genetically modified foods by signing the petition below.

Image via theredproject


Debbie Miller
Debbie Miller2 years ago

Thank you for sharing this! I wish GMO's would never ever be used for our food supply!

Elisa F.
Elisa F.2 years ago


Joseph Najjar
Joseph Najjar2 years ago

Also, for anyone who wants to claim that GM foods gave rats cancer:

In reality, the line of rats used were genetically predisposed to grow tumors, the control rats, which were only fed organic foods grew tumors as well. But that data wasn't reported, nor was it mentioned that the researcher went against international protocols regarding the limits of allowable tumor growth in test subjects. It was bad science, and thats why it was retracted. No one has been able to repeat his results.

Joseph Najjar
Joseph Najjar2 years ago

This is such a typical bit of misinformation. No one wants to take a second to check their, for instance, the fact that there are currently NO transgenic wheat varieties on the commercial market. Or the fact that the wheat proteins responsible for gluten intolerance are naturally present in all Wheat. Or that GM wheat may actually be the only way to reduce gluten sensitivity, since we could silence the genes responsible for producing the problematic proteins

Delmar B.
Delmar B.2 years ago

Correction - the Reader's Digest article is January 2014 - not 2012.

Delmar B.
Delmar B.2 years ago

The January 2012 issue of Reader's Digest has an article that concludes "There doesn't appear to be a scientific reason to ban GMO foods from your pantry to protect your health." One of the reasons for their conclusion was the European Union study that looked at 130 research projects - the same study that I have mentioned below.

Delmar B.
Delmar B.2 years ago

Nathan, with 130 research projects, I can certainly agree with you statment that not 100% of the studies focus on Round-up Ready. Probably only a few are included. Mainly I was trying to say that I find the EU's "main conclusion" to be important because it seems that many in the EU are strongly opposed to GMOs.

Nathan W.
Nathan W.2 years ago

Delmar. I suggested there are GMO studies that have nothing to do with food and pesticides, e.g. erosion control, flood management, etc. I doubt all these studies you are referencing are 100% about Roundup Ready by Monsanto. Yes, they may include it. I never suggested otherwise, as you claim.

Delmar B.
Delmar B.2 years ago

I posted this info below several days ago and Nathan immediately said that a study of GMOs in general was not like a study of Round-up. I asked him how he could conclude that 25 years of EU research did not include Round-up. He did not answer. I can understand that conventional wisdom and intuition can leave many people convinced that GMOs are bad. However, I do not understand how an EU research summary can be dismissed, especially when the European Union has been strongly anti-GMO.

8:11AM PST on Dec 3, 2013

"A Decade of EU-funded GMO research" can be found at this link:
The report states that: "The main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than
130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research,
and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not per se more risky than e.g. conventional plant breeding technologies."

While intuitively, GMOs seem risky, this seems to be a genuine report from the European Union and Europeans have certainly not been in favor of GMOs. I did not find any Summary Page; the statement quoted above about their "main conclusion" was on their page 16 (my PDF window said it was on page 18 of 268.) They talk about more than 10 years of research because a previous EU report on this subjec covered the previous 15 years.

Sanja Maksimovic
Past Member 2 years ago