Following the publication of Séralini’s 2012 study on the health effects of GM NK603 maize and Roundup,1 the editor of the journal that published the paper was bombarded with letters from GM proponents demanding that the paper be retracted. But hundreds of scientists have publicly supported the study and researchers.
Many of those driving the campaign to get Séralini’s paper retracted have been exposed as having links to GM companies and as having vested interests in the public acceptance of GM technology. These links went largely undisclosed in media articles and even in the published letters to the journal, Food and Chemical Toxicology.2 3
The aggressive and often irrational nature of the retraction campaign soon gave rise to a counter-movement. Over a hundred scientists wrote letters to the journal editor in support of Séralini’s study and the cause of independent science, asking the editor not to retract the paper. The letters were translated into English by the staff of Séralini’s research institute, CRIIGEN, and are available here:
This response from international scientists exposes the falsehood of claims by Séralini’s critics that “the science community” has condemned the study,4 and the impression given by the UK-based Science Media Centre that “expert reaction” to the paper was overwhelmingly negative.5
In the following posts we reproduce excerpts from just a few of the scientists’ letters of support for Séralini and his team, their study, and the integrity of the scientific process. We’ve tidied up the English of the translations and edited for conciseness and clarity but aim to accurately reflect the writer’s meaning. If accuracy is important to you, please consult the CRIIGEN documents at the links above.
We also publish comments on Séralini’s study made by scientists in media articles.
1. Séralini GE, Clair E, Mesnage R, et al. Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. Food and Chemical Toxicology. November 2012; 50(11): 4221-4231.
2. Matthews J. Smelling a corporate rat. Spinwatch. 12 December 2012. http://bit.ly/TOZ3Fo
3. Sourice B. The covert war to discredit Séralini’s study [OGM : La guerre secrète pour décrédibiliser l’étude Séralini]. Rue 89. 12 November 2012. http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=14424
4. Entine J. Does the Séralini corn study fiasco mark a turning point in the debate over GM food? Forbes. 30 September 2012. http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/09/30/does-the-seralini-corn-study-fiasco-mark-a-turning-point-in-the-debate-over-gm-food/
5. Science Media Centre. Expert reaction to GM maize causing tumours in rats [press release]. 19 September 2012. http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-gm-maize-causing-tumours-in-rats/