Gilles-Éric Séralini, a molecular biologist at the
University of Caen in France, is hoping for redemption with a new paper about
the effect of pesticides and genetically modified (GMO) feed on rats and mice.
He hasn’t earned that redemption.
A few years ago, Séralini suffered the ultimate
humiliation for a scientist. The Journal Food and Chemical Toxicology retracted his high-profile study. The editors reviewed the
raw data and found the results were “inconclusive” and did not back the
conclusions that were loudly trumpeted in media headlines. The authors themselves eventually conceded that the study had
serious flaws, noting in a press release that “the data are inconclusive, due
to the rat strain and the number of animals used.”
Other long-term studies, which were publicly funded, had
uncovered no health
issues with GMO corn or the herbicide glyphosate. The Japanese Department of
Environmental Health and Toxicology released a 52-week
feeding study of GM soybeans in 2007, finding “no apparent adverse effect
in rats.” In 2012, a team of scientists at the University of Nottingham School
of Biosciences released a review of 12 long-term studies (up to two years)
and 12 multi-generational studies (up to 5 generations) of GM foods in the same
journal that published the Séralini paper, concluding there is no evidence of
health hazards.”
Consequently, there was growing pressure on the journal to retract the original study since publication
in 2012, along with other criticisms and an exchange of letters in the journal......To Read More.....
David Despain
| June 18, 2015 | Genetic Literacy
Project
Financial support
for the release and publicity of the laboratory animal feeding study titled
“Laboratory Rodent Diets Contain Toxic Levels of Environmental Contaminants:
Implications for Regulatory Tests” by Gilles-Eric Séralini and his laboratory
comes from a range of groups who appear to have clear conflicts of interest on
the issue of GMOs and pesticide safety.
No comments:
Post a Comment