Study Linking GM Maize To Rat Tumors Is Retracted

ananyo writes "Bowing to scientists' near-universal scorn, the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology has fulfilled its threat to retract a controversial paper which claimed that a genetically modified (GM) maize causes serious disease in rats after the authors refused to withdraw it. The paper, from a research group led by Gilles-Eric Séralini, a molecular biologist at the University of Caen, France, and published in 2012, showed 'no evidence of fraud or intentional misrepresentation of the data,' said a statement from Elsevier, which publishes the journal. But the small number and type of animals used in the study means that 'no definitive conclusions can be reached.' The known high incidence of tumors in the Sprague-Dawley rat 'cannot be excluded as the cause of the higher mortality and incidence observed in the treated groups,' it added. Today's move came as no surprise. Earlier this month, the journal's editor-in-chief, Wallace Hayes, threatened retraction if Séralini refused to withdraw the paper, which is exactly what he announced at a press conference in Brussels this morning. Séralini and his team remained unrepentant, and allege that the retraction derives from the journal's editorial appointment of biologist Richard Goodman, who previously worked for biotechnology giant Monsanto for seven years."

Comments

The US isn't always wrong.

[jellomizer]

Corn is a major export crop of the United States.

Europe government wants to promote food that is grown within the Union. It really makes sense that a European scientist would feel pressured to find evidence against a primary US import.
As the US agriculture system is very efficient at making low cost food.

I know it is trendy to be Anti-American as it must be some conspiracy from big US companies to hide the truth, like with Big Tobacco.
But what if GM Food is actually perfectly safe like the science says it is.

Re:The US isn't always wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

Fears about GM being somehow more unhealthy or poisonous than regular food are pretty irrational.
However, there are other fears that are more sensible, that have gotten conflated with the health fears, and for some people it's now impossible to separate them:

- Fear that untested modified genes will escape into the environment and mess up the local ecosystem
- Fear that GM crops (roundup-ready!) will increase the use of insecticides, which is a whole other barrel of worms
- Fear that GM foods will give well-connected, litigious and unscrupulous companies *cough*Monsanto*cough* unprecedented and monopolistic control over the world's food supply.

Re:maize??

[AlecC]

Maize is the term used in the UK, where corn means, usually, wheat - sometimes barley.

Many dictionaries say that "corn" means the local most common grain crop, and therefore each grain type needs another name for use where it is not the most common.

Re:'no definitive conclusions can be reached'

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, no, the paper was about GMO corn causing tumors in rats - are you high on weed or something?

Anyway, there is a broad scientific consensus about the safety of GMOs. There are over 600 studies - you can start here: http://www.biofortified.org/genera/studies-for-genera/. Do you want to claim that Monsanto has the entire scientific community locked up in their sphere of influence? That's about as sensible as claiming that human-caused global warming proponents in academia are all part of some liberal conspiracy to implement communism.

Re: "GMOs produce toxins" the only toxins that are being produced are GMOs that have been modified to produce the Bt toxin which is COMPLETELY harmless to humans. The mechanism of action of the Bt pesticide only affects insects - the digestive system of the human is completely unaffected by it. Also, you may not be aware, but Bt is available as a spray and is approved for use even on USDA Organic crops. So even if you're eating organic food, there is a very good chance you're consuming the Bt pesticide.

If you think Bt is unsafe to humans then PROVE IT. Put up or shut up.

Re: maize??

[compro01]

But then, this is the man who worked tirelessly to reintroduce circumcision to the US as a preemptive way discourage masturbation, so screw him.

Corn flakes were a variation on that theme. Kellogg was a follower of the ideas of Sylvester Graham (who also invented the "masturbation causes blindness" nuttery). He believed that spicy or sweet foods led to "passions" and "impure thoughts".

Monsanto is powerful

[koan]

'nuff said.

Re:'no definitive conclusions can be reached'

[Samantha Wright]

I wouldn't go so far as to assume that the FDA is completely overrun. A little under 50% of drugs fail FDA approval on their first application. FDA rejection is costly, and companies have been increasingly been aggressive about doing their own testing first in order to make sure that they don't languish forever in a nightmarish backlog like the one that the USPTO suffers from. I used to know someone who had exactly the sort of near-executive-level pharmaceutical responsibility; as far as I could tell, a lot of the collaboration between FDA people and companies is actually about trying to expedite testing and safety.

On top of that, you have competitive pressures. Nothing is better for a company if they can discover that their competitors have cheated regulations or produced an unsafe product; the battlefield is aggressive and collaborations usually end in backstabbing. If you can produce evidence that another company lied to the FDA or that their products pose a health risk, it can potentially destroy that company. This is one case where a competitive market can be a positive force if the rules are set up right.

That all being said, the FDA does have corruption issues. The Wikipedia article on on regulatory capture lists some much more perverse cases, though, like how the agency responsible for cleaning up after oil spills was renamed and then restructured into oblivion in the days following the Deepwater Horizon spill.