Excerpt: "The animals on the genetically modified (GM) diet suffered mammary tumors, as well as severe liver and kidney damage, according to the peer-reviewed study which was published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology and presented at a news conference in London."
The French team has released images of tumors in mice caused by exclusively eating GM corn. (photo: The Daily Mail)
Monsanto Corn Causes Tumors, Organ Damage in Rats
20 September 12
n a study that prompted sharp criticism from other experts, French scientists said on Wednesday that rats fed on Monsanto's genetically modified corn or exposed to its top-selling weedkiller suffered tumours and multiple organ damage.
The French government asked the country's health watchdog to investigate the findings further, although a number of scientists questioned the study's basic methods and Monsanto said it felt confident its products had been proven safe.
Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen and colleagues said rats fed on a diet containing NK603 - a seed variety made tolerant to dousings of Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller - or given water with Roundup at levels permitted in the United States, died earlier than those on a standard diet.
Experts not involved in the study were sceptical, with one accusing the French scientists of going on a "statistical fishing trip" and others describing its methods as well below standard.
The animals on the genetically modified (GM) diet suffered mammary tumours, as well as severe liver and kidney damage, according to the peer-reviewed study which was published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology and presented at a news conference in London.
The researchers said 50 percent of male and 70 percent of female rats died prematurely, compared with only 30 percent and 20 percent in the control group.
Monsanto spokesman Thomas Helscher said the company would review the study thoroughly. However, he added: "Numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies performed on biotech crops to date, including more than a hundred feeding studies, have continuously confirmed their safety, as reflected in the respective safety assessments by regulatory authorities around the world."
Experts Sceptical
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are deeply unpopular in Europe but dominate major crops in the United States after Monsanto introduced a soybean genetically altered to tolerate Roundup in 1996.
Experts asked by reporters to review the scientific paper advised caution in drawing conclusions from it.
Tom Sanders, head of the nutritional sciences research division at King's College London, noted that Seralini's team had not provided any data on how much the rats were given to eat, or what their growth rates were.
"This strain of rat is very prone to mammary tumours particularly when food intake is not restricted," he said. "The statistical methods are unconventional ... and it would appear the authors have gone on a statistical fishing trip."
Mark Tester, a research professor at the Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics at the University of Adelaide, said the study's findings raised the question of why no previous studies have flagged up similar concerns.
"If the effects are as big as purported, and if the work really is relevant to humans, why aren't the North Americans dropping like flies? GM has been in the food chain for over a decade over there - and longevity continues to increase inexorably," he said in an emailed comment.
David Spiegelhalter of the University of Cambridge said the methods, statistics and reporting of results were all below standard. He added that the study's untreated control arm comprised only 10 rats of each sex, most of which also got tumours.
Long-Term Effects?
While supporters of GM crops say previous studies have overwhelmingly pointed to their safety, critics argue there is still limited information about the long-term effects since the crops have only been around for just over 15 years.
In France, where opposition to GMOs has led to a ban on growing such crops, the government said it had asked its health and safety agency to assess the study and had also sent it to the European Union's food safety agency (EFSA).
"Based on the conclusion ..., the government will ask the European authorities to take all necessary measures to protect human and animal health, measures that could go as far as an emergency suspension of imports of NK603 maize in the European Union," the French health, environment and farm ministries said in a joint statement.
Seralini, the scientist at the centre of the latest research, previously raised safety concerns based on a shorter rat study in 2009. His new study takes things a step further by tracking the animals throughout their two-year lifespan.
Michael Antoniou, a molecular biologist at King's College London, who helped draft the paper, told reporters at a London briefing that its findings highlighted the "need to test all GM crops in two-year lifelong studies".
"I feel this data is strong enough to withdraw the marketing approval for this variety of GM maize temporarily, until this study is followed up and repeated with larger number of animals to get the full statistical power that we want," he said.
Seralini believes his latest lifetime rat tests give a more realistic and authoritative view of risks than the 90-day feeding trials that form the basis of GM crop approvals, since three months is only the equivalent of early adulthood in rats.
France's Jose Bove, vice-chairman of the European Parliament's commission for agriculture and known as an opponent of GM, called for an immediate suspension of all EU cultivation and import authorisations of GM crops. "This study finally shows we are right and that it is urgent to quickly review all GMO evaluation processes," he said in a statement.
The study is also likely to create friction in the United States, where opponents of genetically engineered foods in California are fighting to have all GMOs removed from the food supply.
See Also: Read the peer-reviewed, long-term animal study of GMO foods Here
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |













Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
Since Monsanto continues to say that their GMO products are completely safe we should demand that their executives eat the same diet as the rats and if, in twenty years, they have not developed any of these tumors (or any other negative health effects) we will consider taking the rat pictures off of the labels
http://www.alternet.org/food/how-mitt-romney-and-bain-helped-grow-monsanto-biotech-giant
A Must see.
Monsanto IS the AntiChrist.
Demongel,
Ditto! What makes us 'sentient beings' sooooo special anyway??? I have more than one friend who keep rats as pets and they are delightful animals. As far as the larger picture with Monsanto and the evils in general, VOTE YES ON CA. 37 AND TAKE A FIRST POSITIVE STEP!
the whole friggin' World...
Monsanto, thy name be "EVIL"!!!
Remember that Monsanto is spending millions to stop this.
I would bet that they were behind a program on NPR that claims that there is no difference between organic and conventional food.
I can't tell you how many people I know who can no longer eat wheat. Now we must avoid corn, soy and canola oil--oh and rice because of the high arsenic content in it.
And the government is arresting people who produce raw milk....
The evidence is still irrefutable. No living thing should be eating this stuff and we should not have this forced upon us any longer.
The California Right to Know campaign needs your endorsement in solidarity of labeling. http://www.carighttoknow.org/endorsements
The sad thing is that in the USA if you read this book you will come to the conculusion that vast numbers of people must die and be poisioned for any product to be pulled from the market.
Do yourself a favor and avoid chemicals, GMOs and pesticide. You will feel better and live longer.
We can't win a fight against GMO with this kind of flawed thinking by the scientists who are anti-GMO if, in fact, the author is correct sand the study was actually performed in this manner. Drinking Roundup and eating a GMO food engineered to be resistant to Roundup prove nothing about GMO or Roundup unless the food and the Roundup solution are tested separately.
"This study has been evaluated by the world's best food toxicology magazine, which took much more time than people who reacted within 24 hours without reading the study,"
http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/sns-rt-us-eu-gmo-safetybre88j0wg-20120920,0,1830412.story
Point is, they WERE tested separately. Follow the link at the bottom of the article if you think that wasn't clear in this one.
That said, blatant ignorance, whether by pro or con GMO people, is not helpful in arriving at the truth. "As one who has been ill the past 2 1/2 because of the poisons put on the wheat..." makes me shudder. GMO foods don't have anything PUT ON them. They are the result of inserting the DNA from one species of plant or animal into the genes of a different plant or animal.
Is Barbara K allergic to GMOs or wheat? Did she regularly eat non-GMO wheat for a year with no ill effects, then switch to GMO wheat and suddenly start getting sick again?
The big-AG ads are beginning to hit the airwaves here. They have over $10 million to spend and there are a lot of stupid people here who are registered to vote. If you are in favor of labeling GMO foods, you had better put your money where your mouth is and support the yes on 37 campaign because if this measure fails, it will be a long, cold winter for labeling efforts across the country.
BTW, don't fall for the hysterical ban-all-GMOs hype. It is just as flawed as the GMOs-are-perfec tly-safe hype.
PS: Currently, the article's last statement, "... opponents of genetically engineered foods in California are fighting to have all GMOs removed from the food supply" is not true. We want LABELING, not a ban.
Actually, they ARE (dropping like flies). Watch this: http://geneticroulettemovie.com/
"If the effects are as big as purported, and if the work really is relevant to humans, why aren't the North Americans dropping like flies? GM has been in the food chain for over a decade over there - and longevity continues to increase inexorably."
Here's something in today's news on the "inexorable increase" in Americans' longevity:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/21/us/life-expectancy-for-less-educated-whites-in-us-is-shrinking.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120921
The article quotes a comparison between the five-year decline for white women and the catastrophic seven-year drop for Russian men in the years after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Of course, this doesn't link up directly with GMO, which is just one aspect of America's disastrous industry-led feeding patterns. A cross between eugenics and the feedstock trough...
Remember that Monsanto is spending millions to stop this.
I would bet that they were behind a program on NPR that claims that there is no difference between organic and conventional food.
They "support" NPR. I've heard the commercials before.
RSS feed for comments to this post