LabelGMOs

Seralini Paper Republished!!

Conflicts of interests, confidentiality and

censorship in health risk assessment: the example

of an herbicide and a GMO

Gilles-Eric Séralini1,2*, Robin Mesnage1,2, Nicolas Defarge1,2 and Joël Spiroux de Vendômois2

seralinisuperman.jpg

 

Abstract

We have studied the long-term toxicity of a Roundup-tolerant GM maize (NK603) and a whole Roundup pesticide

formulation at environmentally relevant levels from 0.1 ppb. Our study was first published in Food and Chemical

Toxicology (FCT) on 19 September, 2012. The first wave of criticisms arrived within a week, mostly from plant biologists

without experience in toxicology. We answered all these criticisms. The debate then encompassed scientific arguments

and a wave of ad hominem and potentially libellous comments appeared in different journals by authors having serious

yet undisclosed conflicts of interests. At the same time, FCT acquired as its new assistant editor for biotechnology a

former employee of Monsanto after he sent a letter to FCT to complain about our study. This is in particular why FCT

asked for a post-hoc analysis of our raw data. On 19 November, 2013, the editor-in-chief requested the retraction of our

study while recognizing that the data were not incorrect and that there was no misconduct and no fraud or intentional

misinterpretation in our complete raw data - an unusual or even unprecedented action in scientific publishing. The

editor argued that no conclusions could be drawn because we studied 10 rats per group over 2 years, because they

were Sprague Dawley rats, and because the data were inconclusive on cancer. Yet this was known at the time of

submission of our study. Our study was however never attended to be a carcinogenicity study. We never used the

word cancerin our paper. The present opinion is a summary of the debate resulting in this retraction, as it is a historic

example of conflicts of interest in the scientific assessments of products commercialized worldwide. We also show that

the decision to retract cannot be rationalized on any discernible scientific or ethical grounds. Censorship of research

into health risks undermines the value and the credibility of science; thus, we republish our paper.

Keywords: Conflicts of interests; Confidentiality; Retraction; GMO; Roundup; Glyphosate; NK603

 

Read the rest of the article here. 


Showing 1 reaction

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • commented 2014-07-06 09:11:32 -0700
    Gilles-Eric Seralini, you are my HERO! Thank you for having the moral strength and courage of your sound scientific data.
Volunteer Events Donate