Here's the actual paper.
I really hope headlines like this will help to counter all of the anti-GMO writing in media. I don't think Mansanto nor its kin should be praised, but GMO in an of itself is not to blame. Sure, there are worries about the ecological concerns, but those concerns are separate from the general "GMO is bad for you!" rhetoric.
GMO still has various concerns, and relies on trust in the implementation. Ecologically there's the risk of creating super-invasive weeds. Allergy wise it's both a boon (eg allergy-free peanuts) and a risk (as per my previous comment regarding the use of a barley gene).
That would /seriously/ suck for you. I wouldn't be able to live without rice. I don't have celiac so this doesn't affect me much... but maan, living without delicious rice is like... maaan. And that's one less food item off your alimentation.
Huzzah for GMOs! Though there's still the issue of land depletion, but with careful farming...