|
The covert war to discredit Seralini's study |
|
|
|
|
Written by Frédérique Baudouin
|
|
Wednesday, 14 November 2012 |
There's a simple way to definitively discredit Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini's controversial study that apears to show the potentially harmful effects of GMOs: pressurise the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT) that published it to "retract" the study from its list of publications.
This is what many experts are fighting to achieve in what appears to be an orchestrated attack. It's a veritable public relations war with no holds barred.
The journal has received many letters from critics. It has published around twenty, and a response to the critics by the Séralini team is also available online.
Legitimate scientific debate, you might say. But behind the cohort of academic titles that are listed is a hidden "biotech sphere" which brings together biotechnology researchers, regulatory policy experts and representatives of industry.
These biotechnology proponents denounce the "bad science" ("junk science") of the "militant researchers", who are routinely described as "activists linked to the environmental movement" and as "motivated by personal interests."
An international network
Among the first letters published, there is one that stands out because it has no author listed. It is a joint letter signed by 26 people, most of them scientists, including the [French] national critic of Seralini, Marc Fellous of the French Association for Plant Biotechnology [AFBV].
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512007922
The AFBV is behind the Academies' attack on Gilles-Eric Seralini as a "militant" responsible for the "orchestration of a scientific reputation [...] by spreading fear".
[http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/51-2012/14362 ]
A number of Marc Fellous' co-signatories are linked to the pro-GM group AgBioWorld, led by the geneticist CS Prakash, who is himself a signatory of the joint letter.
Prakash and his organization are also the originators of two petitions the first collected 57 signatures and the second 731) calling for "the release of the raw data" of Gilles-Eric Seralini. Astonishingly, the first signatories of each petition are the same people who sent the letters to the journal FCT.
Viral campaigns of defamation
In 2002, the British newspaper The Guardian revealed that AgBioWorld had played a major role in a "viral campaign" of defamation against the whistleblower Ignacio Chapela after he uncovered the genetic contamination of Mexican corn.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/may/14/greenpolitics.digitalmedia
The inquiry revealed that the [AgBioWorld] organisation's website was hosted by the communications firm Bivings, which was employed by Monsanto and directed by one Jay Byrne.
http://www.powerbase.info/index.php/Jay_Byrne
It used false identities ("Mary Murphy" and "Andura Smetacek") to speak in the name of "the scientific community" and promote the idea that Chapela was linked to environmentalists, who were likened to "terrorists" and "vandals".
http://powerbase.info/index.php?title=Center_for_Food_and_Agricultural_Research
The Bivings company was dissolved in December 2011 after a cyber attack by Anonymous in the guise of "Operation End Monsanto." But Byrne has continued to operate from a headquarters in St. Louis (Illinois, USA), where Monsanto is also headquartered along with his new company V-fluence.
http://www.v-fluence.com/
This strategy of defamation was exactly the one used by Henry Miller, a signatory of the joint letter to FCT, "health regulation" expert at AgBioWorld, and member of the neoconservative think tank, the Hoover Institution.
http://www.agbioworld.org/experts/index.html
In a series of articles published by Forbes, he describes Seralini's study as "fraudulent", and he denounces the "fear profiteers" of a "protest industry funded by organic interests".
This vitriolic attack has Jay Byrne as a co-author, who, the magazine had to disclose, was responsible for viral [PR] communications for Monsanto (1997-2001).
Henry Miller's CV is just as interesting because he is the "founding father" (1989-1994) of GMO regulation at the US Food and Drug Administration. He is the architect, with former Monsanto lawyer Michael Taylor, of the infamous "principle of substantial equivalence", the cornerstone of GMO regulation across the world.
Hidden conflicts of interest
Another striking tactic among critics of Seralini is concealing their relationship with industry and systematically presenting themselves as scientists from universities or research centers.
This applies to Anthony Trewavas and Bruce Chassy, experts in biology and GMOs at AgBioWorld, and both authors of a letter demanding the retraction of Seralini's paper by the journal, Food and Chemical Toxicology.
Presenting himself as Professor Emeritus of Food Safety at the University of Illinois, Chassy is a lobbyist who participated in the drafting of a paper for Dow Chemicals, another biotech giant, aimed at simplifying or removing food safety regulations for GMOs. He is also the lead author, with an employee of Monsanto, of two policy reports [2004, 2008] on the regulation of GMOs for the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), the main lobby group of the food industry.
Note that two leaders of the GMO Panel of the European Agency for Food Safety (EFSA), Harry A. Kuiper, its former chair for nearly ten years (2003-2012) and Gijs A. Kleter, current vice-chair, appear on these strategic documents of ILSI under the direction of Chassy.
Furthermore, while three of the letter writers [to the journal] openly specify their contractual relationship with Monsanto, Dr. Andrew Cockburn modestly presents himself as a toxicologist at the University of Newcastle. However, until 2003, Mr. Cockburn was Scientific Director for Monsanto Europe/Africa before setting up his lobbying firm Toxico-Logical Consulting Ltd..
And since it's a small world, Dr. Cockburn is also the director of the ILSI expert task force on the evaluation of foods containing nanomaterials.
Lobbying for $13 billion
The litany of conflicts of interest and pro-biotech positions of the fifty or so public critics of Seralini's study could continue for pages. We meet representatives of Indian organisations that promote the trade in biotechnology, others who want to end world hunger with a ration of GMOs, or pro-GMO communications specialists (David Tribe), and other lobbyists working between São Paulo, Washington and Brussels, the golden triangle of GMOs...
A closed world, dressed in the garb of science; the well-oiled marketing strategy of a GM seed industry that reaped 13 billion dollars in 2011 – all this stands to be disrupted by Seralini's study. It remains to be seen whether the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology can resist the weight of the lobby that is determined to bury Seralini's study. |
|
The most viewed paper of Prof Séralini's team - Springeropen 2011 |
|
|
|
|
Written by Frédérique Baudouin
|
|
Wednesday, 22 February 2012 |
|
For information, Professor Séralini's group is the one that has published the most in international scientific journals on effects of agricultural edible GMOs and associated pesticides on human and mammalian health. More than EFSA, the FDA or others. Springeropen publishes more than 50 peer-reviewed scientific journals. They indicate that the most viewed (more than 38 000 accesses) in 2011 is the paper "Séralini G-E, Mesnage R, Clair E, Gress S, Spiroux de Vendômois J, Cellier D (2011) Genetically modified crops safety assessments: present limits and possible improvements. Environmental Sciences Europe 23: 10." far before the second most viewed. See http://www.springeropen.com/mostviewed |
|
Last Updated ( Thursday, 23 February 2012 )
|
|
Congratulations to Prof. Charles Sultan ! |
|
|
|
|
Written by Frédérique Baudouin
|
|
Monday, 10 October 2011 |
 Warmest congratulations to Pr Charles Sultan for the Prader Prize he recently received from the ESPE, for lifetime achievement in Pediatric Endocrinology |
|
Last Updated ( Tuesday, 17 April 2012 )
|
|
New responsability of the President of CRIIGEN on GMOs |
|
|
|
|
Written by Frédérique Baudouin
|
|
Wednesday, 15 September 2010 |
GREAT NEWS !!Annoucement of the President of CRIIGEN, Paris September 10th, 2010Since I have been nominated as rapporteur to the European Parliament for amending the 2001/18 European directive on GMOs released in the envionment, I decided to suspend, as of today my duties as President of CRIIGEN. I hope that our Secretary General, Prof. Jean-Marie Pelt, if the Board approved this choice ensures the vacancy of the presidency the necessary time.I ask the Board scheduled for September 17th, 2010 to give me note of this decision.I assure you of my friendship,Corinne LEPAGEThe decision was accepted on September 17, 2010 |
|
Last Updated ( Thursday, 23 February 2012 )
|
|
Pluridisclinary Symposium "Environment & Health" in Caen 11-12 March 2010 |
|
|
|
|
Written by HH
|
|
Sunday, 18 April 2010 |
Frédérick Lemarchand and Gilles-Eric Séralini co-directors of the Risk Pole MRSH, CNRS, University of Caen are delighted to invite you at the following symposium:
Yearly Pluridisciplinary INNOVATION & PRECAUTION SYMPOSIUM University of Caen, Basse-Normandie, right handside building, Lecture Theater Demolombe Programme 11-12 March 2010 |
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 07 January 2011 )
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Opinion of CRIIGEN on the Labelling of GMOs - January 2010 |
|
|
|
|
Written by HH
|
|
Tuesday, 02 February 2010 |
|
Opinion of the Board of Directors and the Scientific Council of CRIIGEN on the Evolution of the Labelling of GMOs and of Animals Fed on GMOs Following the Meeting of 15 January 2010.
Preamble:: The Labelling of GMOs in Europe is evolving in particular where thresholds are concerned. Hence, this poses the following question today: at what threshold exactly is a product considered to contain GMOs? Whether this concerns vegetable products or animal products fed on GMOs (meat, eggs, dairy products, fish and so on and so forth). Up till now, for vegetable products, the threshold has been raised to 0.9 % per ingredient, but no labelling makes it possible for the consumer to know whether or not the animal products he is consuming come from cattle fed on GMOs (or on products contaminated by GMOs, which is more frequent). However GMOs are massively penetrating the food chain via animal feed, and recent counter-expertise work, published by CRIIGEN, as well as Monsanto studies carried out only over three months, on rats fed on 3 different GMOs, make us fear the development of chronic pathologies and demonstrate that the assessment is seriously insufficient. It is therefore crucial and urgent that the consumer should be informed. In response to the recommendation of the French Biotech High Council (HCB) [see our GMO News section] |
|
Last Updated ( Tuesday, 13 April 2010 )
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Symposium on Genetically Engineered Vaccines |
|
|
|
|
Written by HH
|
|
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 |
6 November 2009 Genetically Engineered Vaccines: What Risks? The Symposium on Genetically Engineered Vaccines took place near Paris at Espace Icare, 31 boulevard Gambetta in Issy-les-Moulineaux (Métro Stop Corentin Celton, Line 12) from 2:00 pm till 6:00 pm. Read the Programme in French Presentation of the contributors: M. Michel Georget "Introduction" M. Michel Georget "Contamination potentielle des vaccins" (Potential Contamination of the Vaccines) Dr Dominique Le Houezec "Diversité des accidents" (Diversity of Accidents) Pr Stanislas Pol "Etat officiel des lieux" (The Present Situation as it is Officially Envisaged) Dr Marianne Buhler "Anti-Papillomavirus, avantages & risques" (Anti-Papillomavirus, Advantages & Risks) Dr Christian Vélot "Les incertitudes des techniques du Génie Génétique" (Technical Uncertainties About Genetic Engineering) Dr Eric Faure "Mimétisme moléculaire" (Molecular Imitation) |
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 16 April 2010 )
|
|
Labelling of GMO-Free Products: The French Biotech High Council is Suggesting Allowing Up To a 0.1% |
|
|
|
|
Written by HH
|
|
Thursday, 05 November 2009 |
|
The French Biotech High Council* has recommended that the labelling of GMO-free products should be strictly limited to products which do not contain more than 0.1% transgenic DNA. The French Government announced straight away that they were preparing a decree defining how the law regarding GMO-free labelling should be enforced. * Haut Conseil des Biotechnologies The French Biotech High Council was set up last April, one year and a half after the “Grenelle de l'Environnement”, and was consulted on 15 June 2009 by the Government on the definition of the so-called GMO-free industries, one of the key-elements in the law from 25 June 2008 concerning the freedom of consuming and producing with or without GMOs. In its recommendation, the Biotech High Council Economic, Ethical and Social Committee (CEES) suggests that the “GMO-free” labelling of vegetable products should be strictly limited to the products which do not contain more than 0.1% transgenic DNA, “ie, the lowest technically possible threshold that guarantees both respect for the consumer and reliability in the transactions”.
For animal products like milk, meat or cheese, GMO-free claims such as “raised on GMO-free feed” or “from animals raised from GMO-free feed” should be limited to animal products from animals raised on GMO-free feed with less 0.1% than transgenic DNA, according to CEES. |
|
Last Updated ( Saturday, 01 May 2010 )
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Conference by Denise Jourdan-Hemmerdinger in Caen - May 2008 |
|
|
|
|
Written by HH
|
|
Tuesday, 27 October 2009 |
|
Denise Jourdan-Hermmerdinger gave a fascinating conference at the University of Caen in May 2008, entitled: "About Synthetic Sexual Hormones" How to Get Round the Absence of Dialogue Between the Present (Learned) Medical Profession and the (Ignorant) Patients?
Read the conference in French |
|
Last Updated ( Tuesday, 13 April 2010 )
|
|
News
