Documents & Context

by

Documents

    1. Spiroux de Vendômois, J.; F. Roullier; D. Cellier; G.-E. Séralini. 2009. A comparison of the effects of three GM corn varieties on mammallian health. International Journal of Biological Sciences 5(7): 706-726.
    2. Monsanto. 2009. Monsanto Response: de Vendomois et al. 2009 (A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health) Regarding: MON 863, MON 810 and NK603. Assessment of Quality and Response to Technical Issues.
    3. Food Standards Australia New Zealand. 2009. FSANZ response to Seralini et al. (2009), A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health, Int. J. Biol. Sci. 5(7): 7006-726.
    4. European Food Safety Agency – GMO Panel. 2009. GMO Panel deliberations on the paper by de Vendômois et al. (2009, A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health, International Journal of Biological Sciences, 5: 706-726). Adopted part of the minutes1 of the 55th plenary meeting of the Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms held on 27-28 January 2010.
    5. Haut Conseil des biotechnologies – Comité Scientifique. 2009. Avis relatif à saisine du 15 décembre 2009 de Monsieur le Député François Grosdidier, quant aux conclusions de l’étude intitulée “A comparison of the effects of three GM corn varieties on mammallian health” par J. Spiroux de Vendômois, F. Roullier, D. Cellier & G. E. Séralini, Int. J. Biol. Sci, 2009: 5(7): 706-726.
    6. Association Française des Biotechnologies Végétales. 2009. L’AFBV critique severement la nouvelle publication de G. E. Séralini contre les mais OGM.
    7. CRIIGEN. 2010. International debate about toxicity signs caused by GMOs. Answers from J. Spiroux de Vendômois, D. Cellier, Ch. Vélot & G.-E. Séralini.

Context

The scientific publication “A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health”, where Professor Séralini is the corresponding author, is a counter analysis of data produced by Monsanto. The availability of the data used by Professor Seralini’s team is partly the result of a court order, where the confidentiality of a part of the data was deemed illegal by a German court. The released Monsanto data was a study on rats fed for 3 months with the three maize lines under regulatory consideration. As emphasized by Professor Séralini and co-workers in their articles, in their analysis they do not make claims of evidence of chronic toxicity of the GMOs under study, because the experimental design of the feeding trial by Monsanto contain too numerous deficiencies to allow to draw robust conclusions. What Professor Seralini and colleagues describe, however, is that warning signs are present in the data, which may lead to the development of a chronic condition and therefore strongly merit further inquiry. In other words, they refute the ability of the data provided by Monsanto to formally and scientifically demonstrate the safety of the three GM maize events under investigation, given the poor study design and lack of statistical robustness of the chosen methodology.

Incomprehensibly, the French Association of Plant Biotechnology (AFBV), chaired by Marc Fellous, Professor of Genetics and former president of the Biomolecular Engineering Commission (a governmental commission to assess agricultural GMOs, where Professor Séralini was a member from 1998 to 2007), supported by well-known professors like Claude Allegre and Axel Kahn, stated in a press release dated from December 14, 2009, that “The work of Professor Séralini has been invalidated by the scientific community.” These allegations are totally false and have no basis. Not only has all of the work conducted by Professor Séralini and colleagues been published in international journals after rigorous peer review by anonymous referees, but also none of their work has been subject to any science-based or formal means of invalidation.

Following the participation of Professor Séralini in the TV show Health Magazine on January 21, 2010, on the French TV channel France 5 (where he was invited to talk about his latest study), the same AFBV sent two letters (dated 26 and 28 January) to managers of the channel and the show, including the High Audiovisual Council, resorting to name-calling by describing Professor Séralini as a “merchant of fear” and a scientist not recognized. It would seem that members of the AFBV, declaring themselves all in favor of GMO, are acting more as a political group rather than as scientists.

Moreover, in January 2009 and 2010, the expertise of Professor Séralini was solicited for the Supreme Court of India where the Indian Government had requested the reviewing of the raw data of the Mahyco company’s safety studies conducted to gain approval for commercialization of a new GM eggplant (Bt brinjal), producing an insecticidal toxin. Based on this review, which included a range of other experts, a moratorium was established.

Since then, Professor Séralini has been repeatedly the subject of defamatory attacks extending far beyond any scientific discourse and without any scientifically supported justification or merit. Such attacks fundamentally undermine the principles of due scientific discourse and fairness of an open society.