I’ve occasionally received questions about whether Amway uses genetically modified organism (GMO) crops in their products, in particular in Nutrilite products. I’m personally not overly concerned by GMO if it’s from a company I trust. In past years “gmo” had a simpler name – farming! We’ve been genetically modifying our food supply for thousands of years, through transplanting and interbreeding of different plants and animals. Now we can just do it faster and in a more controlled situation.
Still, I understand peoples concerns. On the weekend though, there was a surprising article posted in China’s People’s Daily Online – Is Amway Nutrilite protein powder as addictive as heroin? The article is a bizarre, non-scientific hit piece, against both Amway and GMO. It cites some studies that found problems with some GMO animals. That’s kind of like saying you shouldn’t eat strawberries (a man-made hybrid fruit) because breading a donkey and a horse will give you an infertile mule. Just plain silly.
But it gets sillier. The article says, about Amway protein powder …
“people really feel better to take the Nutrilite protein powder but feel not as good as before if stop taking it”
… and claim this is evidence the product is addictive and creates dependence like heroin! Right. So if I give a badly dehydrated person water … they’ll feel better. If I stop it and let them get badly dehydrated again, they’ll feel even worse.
Bad water! Bad bad water!
The article has obviously been written or sourced from an Amway competitor, and there’s a big clue to this when we go back to the discussion on GMO –
“Industry insiders said that the Amway Nutrilite protein powder sold in China contains protein from GM soybeans grown in the United States.”
“Industry insiders” huh? That’s code for “competitors”. Still, I was interested if Amway was using GMO so I started googling around, and I found several documents of interest. One was the All Plant Protein Powder FAQ, produced by ” TECHNICAL REGULATORY SERVICES, Access Business Group, South Africa”. Access Business Group (ABG), a part of Alticor, is responsible for manufacturing Amway products. The FAQ says –
42. How do we verify that we use non-genetically modified soybeans?
We follow the European Union standard for providing non-genetically modified ingredients. The supplier of our soy protein isolate has a
stringent quality control system in place to ensure they provide us with non-genetically soybeans. We also ensure this requirement is being
met by using a test known as polymerase chain reaction, or PCR testing. This advanced methodology can test for the presence of genetically
This makes it pretty clear this product has no GMO. But is it perhaps different in different markets? I also found, from the same group at ABG, an FAQ on Nutrilite and Organic Farming –
22. Do Nutrilite farms utilize GMOs or GMMs?
Nutrilite has a long tradition of using organic farm practices on its farms. This policy includes using only traditional
farming methods and natural methods to control insects and prevent crop disease, and has been extended to preclude
the growing of GMO and GMM plants on any Nutrilite farming operation. It reflects Nutrilite’s commitment to providing
customers with products that address all of their concerns
So, Nutrilite farms don’t use GMO/GMM and in Europe/South Africa at least, they follow EU standards for suppliers. The final nail in the coffin for the People’s Daily claim is this, the Nutrilite Global GMO Policy, which states –
All ingredients for Amway core branded products (Nutrilite, Positrim) will be non-GMO or IP with a recombinant DNA threshold of 0.9% with the exception of
flavors, and subcomponents with no function or presence in the final formula.
So there you go. With some minor exceptions, Amway and Nutrilite don’t use GMO ingredients.
25 thoughts on “Does Amway or Nutrilite use GMO crops?”
Here’s an excerpt about what process a seed needs to go through to receive this foreign DNA:
“Step three: “Trait insertion”
Now that you’ve got your genes, the next step is inserting them into the plants. There are a couple ways to do this, including using “gene guns” that literally shoot pieces of DNA. A .22-caliber charge fires a metal particle coated with DNA into plant tissue. Monsanto no longer uses the technique, but it’s still widely used among other biotech companies.
For omega-3 soybeans, Ursin and colleagues used a slightly more delicate process, heating soybean seedlings to place them under stress and make them susceptible to a bug called Agrobacterium tumefaciens. The organism specializes in invading plant DNA and tricking it into producing sugars and amino acids that feed the bacteria. Scientists can exploit this Trojan horse ability and insert new proteins into the plant’s chromosomes. The plant recognizes this foreign encoded protein as one of its own, Ursin said.
“This is now in all the plant progenitor cells. The pollen will have that DNA in its genome, so when you have a pollination event and create new seed, that trait is advanced into the next generation,” she said. And there you have it: a first-generation genetically modified plant.
It’s also a game of chance — just like with breeding, you never know how the offspring will turn out. Ursin and colleagues produced large sets of modified seedlings to make sure the new genes ended up in the right spot on the genome, because if they don’t, the plant could suffer myriad side effects that would make it unsuitable for sale (at a premium price) to farmers.” (Taken from http://www.popsci.com)
This sure as hell isn’t farming. I believe to know what ‘Trait Insertion’ actually is, at to liken it to historical farming is disingenuous at best. I’ll presume ignorance. It took me a few hours of searching to find out how GMO seeds where actually, physically created with heritable traits.
However, I do agree that GMO isn’t a global threat. It’s a personal, familial threat, but not a global one. Most of us understand that it’s bad to screw with nature so severely, then consume the produce of those experiments. If you don’t, I won’t try to convince you now. But I would like to make the claim that GMOs don’t now, and never will, pose a global threat that needs to be fought globally. No matter how bizarre their alterations and effective their heritability.
A single lone man with his family can take his 1/2 acre plot and defeat all the dangers of GMOs in a few short years. Of course the first step is to avoid as much as possible the ingestion of GMO products or the planting of GMO seed. But if he knows to avoid mono-culture, knows how to restore minerals to the soil with salt (and other methods), knows how to avoid all pesticides, herbicides, and irrigation needs (see Back to Eden documentary), then nature itself will sort through what is good, and what is bad, and provide that man and his family with what is good. The GMO traits will perish in time if nature and nature’s God does not approve.
Nature can and will prevail. Every time. Man simply doesn’t have the ability to fundamentally change the behavior of the created order for all of posterity. It’s outside his faculties. No matter how perverse the whole of collective society should grow, one man who fears, loves, and obeys will conquer and inherit the earth.
So yes, GMOs are bad. Avoid them. But don’t build your life around fighting them collectively. Lest you find yourself identifying yourself as “one who fights GMOs”. Then your very identity will depend upon your enemy and the fight against, and you will seek to perpetuate the battle and thus you will sustain your enemy when the battle could be won and ended. I’ve seen it happen in many areas of life.
I notice that in Nutrilite Double X multivitamins that I consume contain maltodextrin label in its ingredient which is GM corn.. could you clarify regarding this matter?
#1) Maltodextrin (from GM corn)
Let’s start out with the big one first: If you pick up a natural product and the ingredients list says “maltodextrin,” chances are very high that the maltodextrin in the product is derived from Monsanto’s GM corn.
Virtually all the maltodextrin used throughout the natural products industry is genetically modified. Products that are certified USDA organic, however, are not using GMO maltodextrin.
The non-GMO, non-corn replacement for maltodextrin derived from GM corn is tapioca maltodextrin, and you’ll find tapioca starch / maltodextrin in many certified organic, non-GMO products. Corn maltodextrin should be avoided unless it’s certified USDA organic. Look for tapioca maltodextrin instead (or no maltodextrin at all).
As per the article, Amway requires their supplies to be non-GMO, ergo the maltodextrin in Amway’s products is non-GMO.
ETA: reading further on the topic, if you’re concerned about potential health issues I can’t see a problem with maltodextrin from GMO corn, as through the processing the final product contains no DNA at all from corn used in the manufacturing process. In other words, while corn is used in the manufacturer of maltodextrin it doesn’t actually exist in the end product.
the author is ignorant, so I didn’t continue to read past “genetic modifafion has been around for thousands of years.” No ma’am, hybridization has been around for thousands of years, genetic modification such as gene splicing so two unrelated species work together, has only been occurring since the 80’s, and was approved by George Bush sr. For human consumption.
So hybridization doesn’t change genetic information? Uhuh.
Most of these argument are stupid. Thus far, there is no internationally-recognized position on the safety of genetically modified foods, and no authoritative evidence that these foods produce toxins when ingested by humans. However, studies showed laboratory animals have suffered severe abnormalities, including sudden death, from ingesting genetically-altered soybeans.
Yes even I read that article and laughed out loud !! Of course some competition tried to instill in people that Nutrilite is GMO therefore bad to consume. And imho, if you feel better AFTER taking it [I can vouch for that] and not so AFTER STOPPING it – it means you have a deficiency that it was filling – as simple as that. And the BSM material I have from Amway India it is clearly stated that Protein powder is made from NON-GMO Soy grown by Nutrilite. I have a sorted Excel sheet of testimonials from many NON-IBOs who have had significant improvement in their lives thanks to Nutrilite and I can share it with you ibofightback.
Thy sad that they are using GMO in their nutrilite book I read this book myself
What book was this? And how old was it? As you can see in the links I provided, since at least 2010 the policy has been no GMO
Thank you for this article. I use Nutrilite products and am trying eliminate any with GMO in the ingredients.
Do you know what the phrase “or IP with a recombinant DNA threshold of 0.9%” means? What does IP stand for?
What do they mean by the exception “of flavors, and subcomponents with no function or presence in the final formula”.
It seems strange to cite exceptions that are not used in the “final formula”. Or are they saying they do use them in their processing of Nutrilite products? Are you aware if such exceptions are explicitly identified?
I meant to say “not used” in the “final formula”. We need an edit feature on these posts.
fixed it for you! 🙂
Given the amounts they’re talking about (less than 1%) I suspect it’s because it may be very difficult to impossible to ensure there’s zero contamination through the entire supply chain, so the guideline allows for this.
It’s not 1% but between 0.9%-5% depends upon the market. So I suspect the product sold in one country slightly different from the product sold in another country.
The link is above: http://www.amwaywiki.com/images/7/74/NutriliteGlobalGMOPolicy.pdf
In case you’re still looking for IP. It is identity preserved. Check this out: http://www.amwaywiki.com/images/a/a7/NutriliteandOrganicFarming.pdf
Hi there. I just wanted to make a few corrections to your post.
Farming and genetic engineering (the process which leads to “GMOs)” are not actually the same thing. Cross breeding plants, such as the process used to “create” the common garden /grocery store strawberry, is not the same as implanting genetic code into another species. Strawberries exist in nature, and it was by cross breeding two existing species of strawberries ( Fragaria virginiana with Fragaria chiloensis) that led to Fragaria × ananassa. The organisms in question much be genetically compatible enough to reproduce naturally and produce offspring. The offspring itself may not be able to reproduce, or at least it is very rare (like a mule), or it may (like garden strawberries). Genetic engineering is taking genetic material from a species generally re-productively incompatible with another and inserting it directly into the other genetic code. For example, never ever ever would a tomato plant have sex with a fish and produce offspring, and yet through genetic modification we now have fish tomatoes. Since your blog is attempting to provide truth, I don’t want its credibility to be undermined by a misunderstanding around genetic engineering. It’s a common mistake, so thank you for giving me the opportunity to clarify for your readers. Even with this description, I’m still simplifying, so I would strongly encourage readers to do a bit of research. It’s fascinating stuff.
It is also important to note that “organic” doesn’t mean “good for you.” Arsenic is organic and naturally, but I won’t be ingesting large quantities of that any time soon. : ) Mass produced food companies have attempted many different methods to overcame competitiveness in a flooded market. I wouldn’t be surprised if any company used additives to increase their appeal to their audiences. MSG, for example, has a reputation as an additive or “flavor-enhancer” that makes food more addictive.
Thanks for your blog!
Sorry for the spelling mistake!
“Arsenic is organic and natural…”
You are of course technically correct – the term “genetically modified organism” as used today relates to those created/modified directly using bioengineering. I (and many others) would argue that hybridization through farming is a form of primitive genetic engineering, just far less sophisticated! Either way, it’s a semantics issue. The point is that “gmo” isn’t inherently dangerous, and, as you point out “organic” isn’t inherently good, or even safe, either. (If we’re talking semantics though, in the US “organic” strictly speaking refers only to the (non) use of artificial chemicals in aspects of farming!)
Why do people always try to use the semantics argument when ever someone tries to go to the heart of the matter? Genetic engineering is a new term, design to describe a new process of directly trying to temper with DNA. It did not existed before; there was no primitive generic engineering; it was farming
Are u sure that ‘gmo’ isn’t inherently dangerous? It’s totally dangerous! and it should be avoid at any cost!
GMO is not inherently dangerous and in fact has a lot of power for “good”. Like any product, whether farmed naturally or straight out of a lab, there’s also the possibility for it to not be healthy. Be aware of what you eat and what ingredients are in the products you use, but just because something might be GMO doesn’t automatically make it dangerous.
I’m totally go with you in this matter , GMO it is very dangerous , maybe no if you do it for a day, but thru the years it is a concern, so many people still so ignorant now day poor people,
That’s true and it alters our DNA. Check this link http://www.naturalnews.com/054411_Kevin_Folta_Forbes_propaganda_GMOs.html
As a general rule I’ve learned that if something is published on naturalnews.com, then it’s probably not true!