Support Séralini Team for GMO Risk Research - CRIIGEN
Soutenir le CRIIGEN

Conflicts of interests, confidentiality and censorship in health risk assessment: the example of an herbicide and a GMO

Mardi 24 Juin 2014

Environmental Sciences Europe 2014, 26:13
http://www.enveurope.com/content/26/1/13
Open Access

Conflicts of interests, confidentiality and censorship in health risk assessment: the example of an herbicide and a GMO


Gilles-Eric Séralini , Robin Mesnage, Nicolas Defarge and Joël Spiroux de Vendômois

 

Abstract


We have studied the long-term toxicity of a Roundup-tolerant GM maize (NK603) and a whole Roundup pesticide formulation at environmentally relevant levels from 0.1 ppb. Our study was first published in Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT) on 19 September, 2012. The first wave of criticisms arrived within a week, mostly from plant biologists without experience in toxicology. We answered all these criticisms. The debate then encompassed scientific arguments and a wave of ad hominem and potentially libellous comments appeared in different journals by authors having serious yet undisclosed conflicts of interests. At the same time, FCT acquired as its new assistant editor for biotechnology a former employee of Monsanto after he sent a letter to FCT to complain about our study. This is in particular why FCT asked for a post-hoc analysis of our raw data. On 19 November, 2013, the editor-in-chief requested the retraction of our study while recognizing that the data were not incorrect and that there was no misconduct and no fraud or intentional misinterpretation in our complete raw data - an unusual or even unprecedented action in scientific publishing. The editor argued that no conclusions could be drawn because we studied 10 rats per group over 2 years, because they were Sprague Dawley rats, and because the data were inconclusive on cancer. Yet this was known at the time of submission of our study. Our study was however never attended to be a carcinogenicity study. We never used the word ‘cancer’ in our paper. The present opinion is a summary of the debate resulting in this retraction, as it is a historic example of conflicts of interest in the scientific assessments of products commercialized worldwide. We also show that the decision to retract cannot be rationalized on any discernible scientific or ethical grounds. Censorship of research into health risks undermines the value and the credibility of science; thus, we republish our paper.

 

Keywords : Conflicts of interests; Confidentiality; Retraction; GMO; Roundup; Glyphosate; NK603