Study Shows Real Danger From Genetically Modified Corn

Share on Google+0Share on Facebook4Tweet about this on TwitterPin on Pinterest0

Genetically modified

foods have been touted by the food industry as the answer to our food shortages.

gmo cornA new study linking

genetically modified

maize to cancer was published in the British Guardian paper recently and must be taken seriously by regulators.

French professor of molecular biology at Caen University, Gilles-Eric Séralini, knows his work on the the

genetically modified

(GM) industry is NOT appreciated at all.

For seven years he and his team have questioned the safety standards applied to varieties of

genetically modified

maize and tried to re-analyse “industry funded studies” presented to governments.

The genetically modified industry has reacted furiously and personally. Why is easy to answer… Professor Séralini has been widely insulted and smeared and last year, and in some desperation, he sued Marc Fellous, president of the French Association of Plant Biotechnology, for defamation, just to relieve some of the attacking pressures.

Just look at some of the criticisms and their sources:

“This is not an innocent scientific publication. The study was designed to produce exactly what was observed,” said Dr Bruce Chassy, professor emeritus of food science at the University of Illinois, who has worked as a consultant for genetically modified companies and has been a member of the US Food and Drug Administration’s Food Advisory Council which is fully behind GM.

“This study appears to be without scientific merit,” said Martina Newell-McGloughlin, director of the International Biotechnology Program at the University of California/Davis, which has close links to Monsanto and other GM companies.

gmo corn“The control group is inadequate to make any deduction,” said Anthony Trewavas, prominent champion of GM food and a former member of the governing council of Britain’s leading plant biotech research organisation, the John Innes Centre.

Monsanto was dismissive: “This study does not meet minimum acceptable standards for this type of scientific research, the findings are not supported by the data presented, and the conclusions are not relevant for the purpose of safety assessment.”

Here are Professor Séralini’s responses:

1. The French researchers were accused of using the Sprague Dawley rat strain which is said to be prone to developing cancers. In response Séralini and his team say these are the same rats as used by Monsanto in the 90-day trials which it used to get authorization for its maize. This strain of rat has been used in most animal feeding trials to evaluate the safety of genetically modified foods, and their results have long been used by the biotech industry to secure approval to market genetically modified products.

2. The sample size of rats was said to be too small. Séralini responded that six is the OECD recommended protocol for genetically modified food safety toxicology studies and he had based his study on the toxicity part of OECD protocol no. 453. This states that for a cancer trial you need a minimum of 50 animals of each sex per test group but for a toxicity trial a minimum of 10 per sex suffices. Monsanto used 20 rats of each sex per group in its feeding trials but only analyzed 10, the same number as Séralini.

3. No data was given about the rats’ food intake. Seralini says the rats were allowed to eat as much food as they liked.

4. Séralini has not released the raw data from the trial. In response he says he won’t release it until the data underpinning Monsanto’s authorization of NK603 in Europe is also made public.

5. His funding was provided by an anti-biotechnology organization whose scientific board Séralini heads. But he counters that almost all genetically modified research is funded by corporations or by pro-biotech institutions.

So where does all this genetically modified talk leave the public?

Despite the concerns, it looks like the study will not be swept under the carpet.

It’s the longest study done on this variety of maize and many argue that it must be taken seriously by regulators and governments.

French health and safety authorities now plan to investigate NK603, the study’s findings and the European Food Safety Agency has said it will assess the research.

Séralini is now demanding that all the data be assessed by an independent international committee, arguing that experts involved in the authorization of the maize should not be involved.

Genetically modified foods are being forced on the populations of the world and will be used as long as the food cartels of this world have their way.

Leave a Reply

  • RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Pinterest