Wow you obviously know a lot more about this study than me. I just learned about this one myself.
I thought you weren't going to argue about GMOs. I don't know anything about that study. I just read the abstract and some summaries. The flaws are apparent from a distance.
Surely you can show really good studies showing evidence that GMO soy is really good for human consumption, especially since that would have been required by the federal government in order for it to be approved, right?
I assume that last part is sarcasm, since most of what we eat hasn't specifically been proven safe in laboratory studies. The only "study" that proves most things are safe for humans is widespread consumption over time. Unless the FDA requires specific research indicating a crop is safe, nobody's going to bother. And in most cases, including soy, the FDA considers the GM substantially similar enough to the natural that it rubber stamps the approval.
Also, this evidence you are going to show me (I'm sure you have it) must not be well known in most all of the other developed nations since they have banned GMOs for human consumption.
That's simply not true. GMOs are legal in almost all of the EU. Britain and Spain even grow their own. Canada grows a massive amount. Most of Australia is fine with them. Poland, Portugal, Germany, and Sweden all grown some GMO crops, though not many. The EU in particular does go back and forth pretty frequently, though.
Anyway, like I said, there aren't studies to show that it's safe, but I didn't claim there were. There just also aren't any proving that it's dangerous. There are definitely good reasons to avoid it and even to ban it, but they aren't health-related. A lot of people avoid it because of a nebulous fear that it's not "natural," that it's some sort of franken-crop. They're certainly free to do so, but the evidence just isn't there.