De resultaten van de studie verschenen in 2012. De redactie vroeg Séralini zijn artikel vrijwillig te herroepen door het terug te trekken. Hij weigerde. Daarop trok de redactie het terug.
Op GMOSeralini.org valt te lezen hoe de geschiedenis van het artikel zich ontwikkelde tot de herpublicatie deze week in Environmental Sciences Europe, waardoor het weer wetenschappelijk status heeft.
GMOSeralini schrijft onder meer:
The study found severe liver and kidney damage and hormonal disturbances in rats fed the GM maize and low levels of Roundup that are below those permitted in drinking water in the EU. Toxic effects were found from the GM maize tested alone, as well as from Roundup tested alone and together with the maize. Additional unexpected findings were higher rates of large tumours and mortality in most treatment groups.
The study was first published in Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT) in September 2012 but was retracted by the editor-in-chief in November 2013 after a sustained campaign of criticism and defamation by pro-GMO scientists.
Now the study has been republished by Environmental Sciences Europe. The republished version contains extra material addressing criticisms of the original publication. The raw data underlying the study’s findings are also published – unlike the raw data for the industry studies that underlie regulatory approvals of Roundup, which are kept secret. However, the new paper presents the same results as before and the conclusions are unchanged.
The republished study is accompanied by a separate commentary by Prof Séralini’s team describing the lobbying efforts of GMO crop supporters to force the editor of FCT to retract the original publication.
GMOSeralini.org editor Claire Robinson commented: “This study has now successfully passed no less than three rounds of rigorous peer review.
“The first was for the initial publication of the study in Food and Chemical Toxicology. It passed with only minor revisions, according to the authors.
“The second review took months. It involved a non-transparent examination of Prof Séralini’s raw data by a secret panel of unnamed persons organized by the editor-in-chief of FCT, A. Wallace Hayes, in response to criticisms of the study by pro-GMO scientists.
“In a letter to Prof Séralini, Hayes admitted that the anonymous reviewers found nothing ‘incorrect’ about the results presented. However, Hayes pointed to what he said was the ‘inconclusive’ nature of some aspects of the paper, namely the tumour and mortality observations, to justify his decision to retract the study.
“The rationale given for the retraction was widely criticized by scientists as an act of censorship and a bow to the interests of the GMO industry. Some scientists pointed out that numerous published scientific papers contain inconclusive findings, including Monsanto’s own short (90-day) study on the same GM maize, and have not been retracted. The retraction was even condemned by a former member of the editorial board of FCT.
“Now the study has passed a third peer review arranged by the journal that is republishing the study, Environmental Sciences Europe."
Recent kwam vanuit Frankrijk een officiële uitspraak die stelt dat de (on)gezondheid van GMO's onbeslisbaar is. Daaruit zou kunnen volgen dat het Voorzorgsprincipe op GMO-producten van toepassing wordt.
Op Foodlog leidde de herpublicatie alweer onmiddellijk tot gepolariseerde commentaren (zie in de link #75 tot en met #79).
Op 5 maart krijg je nieuwe kado-artikelen.
Als betalend lid lees je zoveel artikelen als je wilt, én je steunt Foodlog