A highly controversial paper by Prof Gilles-Eric Séralini and colleagues has been republished after a stringent peer review process. The chronic toxicity study examines the health impacts on rats of eating a commercialized genetically modified (GM) maize. The original study, published in Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT) in September 2012, found severe liver and kidney damage and hormonal disturbances in rats fed the GM maize and low levels of Roundup that are below those permitted in drinking water in the EU. However it was retracted by the editor-in-chief of the Journal in November 2013 after a sustained campaign of criticism and defamation by pro-GMO scientists. Toxic effects were found from the GM maize tested alone, as well as from Roundup tested alone and together with the maize. Additional unexpected findings were higher rates of large tumours and mortality in most treatment groups. Now the study has been republished by Environmental Sciences Europe. The republished version contains extra material addressing criticisms of the original publication. The raw data underlying the study’s findings are also published – unlike the raw data for the industry studies that underlie regulatory approvals of Roundup, which are kept secret. However, the new paper presents the same results as before and the conclusions are unchanged. The republication restores the study to the peer-reviewed literature so that it can be consulted and built upon by other scientists. The republished study is accompanied by a separate commentary by Prof Séralini’s team describing the lobbying efforts of GMO crop supporters to force the editor of FCT to retract the original publication. The authors explain that the retraction was ”a historic example of conflicts of interest in the scientific assessments of products commercialized worldwide.” ... Claire Robinson, editor of GMOSeralini.org, commented: ”This study has now successfully passed no less than three rounds of rigorous peer review.” ... Dr Michael Antoniou, a molecular geneticist based in London, commented, Few studies would survive such intensive scrutiny by fellow scientists. The republication of the study after three expert reviews is a testament to its rigour, as well as to the integrity of the researchers. If anyone still doubts the quality of this study, they should simply read the republished paper. The science speaks for itself.
Posted on: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 17:25:10 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015