It took a while
but it appears that Monsanto has at least managed to have the hugely damaging
Seralini Study retracted. However that
study has triggered many other studies that while not likely to be published
now in a prestigious journal, can be shouted from the rooftops. This was a piece of work that Monsanto surely
hoped would simply go away.
In the meantime,
everyone is becoming fully acquainted with Monsanto’s strategy of managing
research outcomes to promote Monsanto products and this is shaping up to be
possibly the greatest corporate miscalculation in History. What it is clearly proving is that science is
not to be trifled with.
We now have a
series of global conjectures all wrapped around Monsanto and its biological
gambling.
1
Amphibian
collapse approaching mass extinction coincident with Roundup market penetration.
2
Roundup
impacting the human gut biota triggering a spectrum of modern disease.
3
Bee
colony collapse worldwide with the implementation of roundup ready seeds.
4 Establishment
of the biological pathways explaining why this is not a safe pesticide.
5
GMO
damage to mammal health including a shortening of lifespan and obesity.
The nasty take
home lesson is that biological strategies at the molecular level are turning
out very badly in the long term and they demand an entirely different research
protocol such as testing in large natural refugia while measuring all possible biological
markers. We are too ignorant to be able
to successfully extend simple research protocols however encouraging.
GMO RAT STUDY
RETRACTED..BY NEW JOURNAL EDITOR FROM (SURPRISE!) MONSANTO
Posted by: Daisy Luther | on November 30, 2013
Remember the Seralini study, with those gruesome
images of GMO-fed rats that were engulfed by horrific tumors? Well, great
news! You can grab yourself some GMO corn and chow down now because the journal
that published the study has retracted it. Silly us, there was absolutely
nothing to worry about!
The new editor over at the journal, Food and Chemical
Toxicology, says so – you know, Richard E. Goodman, the editor that used
to work in the hallowed halls of Monsanto.
Wait….what????????????????????
I guess it wasn’t enough for Monsanto to infiltrate the government at every level -
now they have to install staff to keep their GMO death crops from being
negatively reviewed at respected scientific journals.
Rady Ananda, of Food Freedom News and Activist Post, reports:
In February of 2013, the FCT hired Monsanto’s former
employee, Richard E. Goodman, for a new position reviewing biotechnology
papers. On November 19, the FCT reported its decision to retract the published paper
stating the study’s results were inconclusive because there weren’t enough rats
used in the study, and the strain of rat used was not acceptable.
Writing for CRIIGEN, the independent lab with which
Seralini is affiliated, Frédérique Baudouin noted that a short Monsanto study, which was published
in the same journal to prove the safety of its product, “was conducted with the
same strain and number of rats.”
Séralini has promised to sue. (source)
In case you don’t recall the findings of this study
that has Monsanto running scared, here’s a quick refresher.
The rodents were fed a lifetime of genetically
modified corn that had been doused with Roundup (glyphosate) during its growing
process. The tragic results proved that the rats had a 50-70% chance
of developing horrific, grotesque tumors from the diet. Naysayers
attempted to refute the science behind the study and a war developed in the
scientific community, one that is clearly ongoing with this Monsanto scientist
that was very obviously put in place to discredit the harmful-to-Monsanto
report. Natural News summarized some findings of the
study:
• Up to 50% of males and 70% of females
suffered premature death.
• Rats that drank trace amounts of Roundup (at
levels legally allowed in the water supply) had a 200% to 300% increase in
large tumors.
• Rats fed GM corn and traces of Roundup
suffered severe organ damage including liver damage and kidney
damage.
• The study fed these rats NK603, the Monsanto
variety of GM corn that’s grown across North America and widely fed to animals
and humans. This is the same corn that’s in your corn-based breakfast cereal,
corn tortillas and corn snack chips.
The infiltration of Monsanto into the halls of
academia did not go unnoticed to a group of scientists in Europe. They
have harshly denounced the whole sordid camouflage job.
A European network of scientists (ENSSER) has
also published a scathing condemnation of FCT’s behavior,
warning that this level of corruption is “a flagrant abuse of science” that
will “decrease public trust in science.” No doubt.
Going further, ENSSER condemned the FCT for
violating “not only the criteria for retraction to which the journal itself
subscribes, but any standards of good science.”
A recent article calling this matter ‘The Goodman Affair,’ noted that:
Richard E. Goodman is professor at the Food Allergy
Research and Resource Program, University of Nebraska. But he is also a former
Monsanto employee, who worked for the company between 1997 and 2004. While at Monsanto he assessed the
allergenicity of the company’s GM crops and published papers on its behalf on
allergenicity and safety issues relating to GM food (Goodman and Leach
2004).”Beyond all this, Seralini wasn’t even looking for cancer, which would
require a larger number of animals, but merely prepared a chronic toxicity
study under the same conditions that Monsanto used to assert the GM corn’s
safety.
ENSSER explains that the short term study found not
only “pronounced toxic effects” but also “increased tumour rates.” Further, the
Sprague-Dawley strain of rat is the “commonly used standard for this type of
research” and was the same one Monsanto used.
Most importantly, “Unpleasant results should be
checked, not ignored. And the toxic effects other than tumours and mortality
are well-founded.”
ENSSER concluded that, “Prof. Séralini’s findings
stand today more than before, as even this secret review found that there is nothing
wrong with either technicalities, conduct or transparency of the data – the
foundations on which independent science rests. The conclusiveness of their
data will be decided by future independent science, not by a secret circle of
people.”
Monsanto is clearly striving diligently to undo the
damage done by activists spreading the word about their toxic takeover of the
food supply. They are blatantly covering up the information that people
need to have access to in order make informed decisions about the consumption
of GMOs. I’m certainly not swayed by this retraction. I stand by my former
recommendation: GMOs are not safe, even in moderation.
Learn more here: Monsanto
behind Journal’s retraction of GMO rat-cancer link
Saturday, November 30, 2013
Rady Ananda
http://www.activistpost.com/2013/11/monsanto-behind-journals-retraction-of.html
After a 2012 study linking cancer with Monsanto’s genetically modified corn, the scientific journal that published the study is now retracting it, after hiring a former Monsanto employee to fill a new editorial position reviewing biotechnology papers.
After a 2012 study linking cancer with Monsanto’s genetically modified corn, the scientific journal that published the study is now retracting it, after hiring a former Monsanto employee to fill a new editorial position reviewing biotechnology papers.
In September 2012, the scientific journal, Food and Chemical Toxicology(FCT), published the study of Gilles-Eric Séralini, et al. which reviewed the toxicological effects of Monsanto’s NK603, and its requisite Round-Up pesticide.
They found “severe toxic effects (including liver congestions, necrosis and kidney nephropathies), increased tumor rates and higher mortality in rats fed Monsanto’s genetically modified NK603 maize and/or the associated herbicide Roundup.”
In February of 2013, the FCT hired Monsanto’s former employee, Richard E. Goodman, for a new position reviewing biotechnology papers. On November 19, the FCT reported its decision to retract the published paper stating the study’s results were inconclusive because there weren’t enough rats used in the study, and the strain of rat used was not acceptable.
Writing for CRIIGEN, the independent lab with which Seralini is affiliated, Frédérique Baudouin notedthat a short Monsanto study, which was published in the same journal to prove the safety of its product, “was conducted with the same strain and number of rats.”
Séralini has promised to sue.
Baudouin pointed out other fallacies in the Monsanto study which won regulatory approval for NK 603, noting that “its comparators are false because the feed for control rats is contaminated by GMOs, at doses comparable to the treated rats.”
Nice, sloppy work, Monsanto; and shame on FCT for
its double standards.
A European network of scientists (ENSSER) has also published a scathing condemnation of FCT’s behavior, warning that this level of corruption is “a flagrant abuse of science” that will “decrease public trust in science.” No doubt.
Going further, ENSSER condemned the FCT for violating “not only the criteria for retraction to which the journal itself subscribes, but any standards of good science.”
A recent article calling this matter ‘The Goodman Affair,’ noted that:
Richard E. Goodman is professor at the Food Allergy
Research and Resource Program, University of Nebraska. But he is also a former
Monsanto employee, who worked for the company between 1997 and 2004. While at Monsanto he assessed the
allergenicity of the company’s GM crops and published papers on its behalf on
allergenicity and safety issues relating to GM food (Goodman and Leach 2004).”
Beyond all this, Seralini wasn’t even looking for
cancer, which would require a larger number of animals, but merely prepared a
chronic toxicity study under the same conditions that Monsanto used to assert
the GM corn’s safety.
ENSSER explains that the short term study found not only “pronounced toxic effects” but also “increased tumour rates.” Further, the Sprague-Dawley strain of rat is the “commonly used standard for this type of research” and was the same one Monsanto used.
Most importantly, “Unpleasant results should be checked, not ignored. And the toxic effects other than tumours and mortality are well-founded.”
ENSSER concluded that, “Prof. Séralini’s findings stand today more than before, as even this secret review found that there is nothing wrong with either technicalities, conduct or transparency of the data – the foundations on which independent science rests. The conclusiveness of their data will be decided by future independent science, not by a secret circle of people.”
The biotech industry has a long history of quashing any science that shows its products are harmful. In the breakthrough film, The World According to Monsanto, Marie-Monique Robin revealed how Dr Arpad Pusztai lost his career when he went on British television with his findings that the GM potato caused organ and system damage in rats, as well as precancerous cell growth. She also included the story of what happened when Dr Ignacio Chapela discovered that GM corn was contaminating natural corn in Mexico.
Not only quashing science, but the biotech industry, including Monsanto, has also poured tens of millions of dollars into hiding which foods contain GMOs. Though 90-95% of the public wants this food label, for some strange reason when they vote on it, the measure gets defeated. (Must be those computerized voting systems Bush forced on us.)
The biotech industry is also busy negotiating a 12-nation trade agreement that would force GMOs on the market regardless of local laws. The US is leading that pact which gives these biotech companies complete control over our food, and which subverts national sovereignty in favor of corporate rule.
The FCT’s new biotechnology reviewer helps achieve these aims. Goodman is active in the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), which “develops industry-friendly risk assessment methods for GM foods and chemical food contaminants and inserts them into government regulations,” reports Jonathan Latham, PhD.
Because ILSI is funded by biotech and agrochemical
companies, including Monsanto, it is barred from helping write safety standards
for the World Health Organization. Latham adds that Diana Banati, former head
of the management board at the European Food Safety Authority, had to resign
over her undisclosed long-standing involvement with ILSI.
Clearly, the biotech industry knows its product is harmful, or it wouldn’t expend so much time, effort and money on suppressing negative science, hiding which foods contain GMOs, and forcing it on countries through secret trade agreements.
Rady Ananda is the creator of Food Freedom News and COTO Report, Rady Ananda's work has appeared in several online and print publications, including four books. With a B.S. in Natural Resources from Ohio State University’s School of Agriculture, Rady tweets @geobear7 and @RadysRant.
No comments:
Post a Comment