Comment on “Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize” by Séralini et al.

Grunewald, Wim; Bury, Jo

doi:10.1016/j.fct.2012.10.051

Cited by 10 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This 2-year study in rats appeared to reveal higher death rates, more tumours, together with liver and kidney pathologies in GM-fed groups. But the conclusions of the Séralini studies have been comprehensively rebutted in the literature and various agencies throughout the world (EFSA 2012; Arjó et al 2013;Grunewald and Bury 2013;Jany 2013;Kuiper et al 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

A 90-day subchronic feeding study of genetically modified rice expressing Cry1Ab protein in Sprague–Dawley rats

Song

Zou

et al. 2014

Transgenic Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) transgenic rice line (mfb-MH86) expressing a synthetic cry1Ab gene can be protected against feeding damage from Lepidopteran insects, including Sesamia inferens, Chilo suppressalis, Tryporyza incertulas and Cnaphalocrocis medinalis. Rice flour from mfb-MH86 and its near-isogenic control MH86 was separately formulated into rodent diets at concentrations of 17.5, 35 and 70 % (w/w) for a 90-day feeding test with rats, and all of the diets were nutritionally balanced. In this study, the responses of rats fed diets containing mfb-MH86 were compared to those of rats fed flour from MH86. Overall health, body weight and food consumption were comparable between groups fed diets containing mfb-MH86 and MH86. Blood samples were collected prior to sacrifice and a few significant differences (p \ 0.05) were observed in haematological and biochemical parameters between rats fed genetically modified (GM) and non-GM diets. However, the values of these parameters were within the normal ranges of values for rats of this age and sex, thus not considered treatment related. In addition, upon sacrifice a large number of organs were weighed, macroscopic and histopathological examinations were performed with only minor changes to report. In conclusion, these results demonstrated that no toxic effect was observed in the conditions of the experiment, based on the different parameters assessed. GM rice mfb-MH86 is as safe and nutritious as non-GM rice.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

A 90-day subchronic feeding study of genetically modified rice expressing Cry1Ab protein in Sprague–Dawley rats

Song

Zou

et al. 2014

Transgenic Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…"The study appeared to sweep aside all known benchmarks of scientific good practice and, more importantly, to ignore the minimal standards of scientific and ethical conduct…" (Arjo et al [11]), and "Throughout their manuscript, Séralini et al ignore clear indications that there is something fundamentally wrong in their experimental design" (Grunewald [13]). …”

Section: General Criticismsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…About 17 letters to the editor of Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT) criticised the paper and asked for its retraction [10]; 3. A fuller paper of criticism appeared later (Arjo et al [11]), and an informative report was published by The Flemish Interuniversity Institute for Biotechnology (Vlaams Interuniversitair Instituut voor Biotechnologie) (VIB) [12], (quoted by [13] in the submission to FCT); the European Food Safety Authority compiled similar materials [14] which were the subject of critique by Meyer and Hillbeck [7]. Seralini et al reply to other parts of Arjo et al's arguments, in their republished paper in this journal [6].…”

Section: Sources Of the Criticisms Of The Seralini Et Al Papermentioning

confidence: 99%

A challenge to scientific integrity: a critique of the critics of the GMO rat study conducted by Gilles-Eric Séralini et al. (2012)

Loening

2015

Environ Sci Eur

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the many criticisms of the publication by Seralini et al (2012) which has led to so much controversy, was retracted and then republished in this journal. Seralini et al found that a GM maize and its associated herbicide Roundup resulted in numerous chronic abnormalities in rats. The vehemence of the critics is not matched by their evidence; it is often based on entrenched assumptions and on mis-representing published material. The arguments have challenged normal healthy scientific dialogue, and appear to be driven by other motives. A further interpretation of Seralini et al's results on tumour formation is suggested. The probability that Seralini et al's results are significant is sufficient to justify further study.

show abstract

“…However, long-term studies can be difficult to interpret because many strains of rodents, including those used by Séralini and collaborators, spontaneously develop tumors and other health problems after 18 months (Brix et al 2005). To conduct a rigorous long-term feeding study it is therefore necessary to design it so that it can distinguish between adverse effects due to the diet and adverse effects resulting from normal deterioration of rodent health (Grunewald and Bury 2013). …”

Section: The Séralini Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous critics argued that the sample size (ten per male and female group) was too small to draw meaningful conclusions, especially for long-term studies in which the laboratory animals are likely to develop significant health problems after 18 months (Arjo et al 2013; de Souza and Macedo 2013; Grunewald and Bury 2013; Hammond et al 2013; Robert et al 2013; Tien and Huy 2013). According to several critics, the control group and nine experimental groups should have included at least 50 animals per sex (Grunewald and Bury 2013; Hammond et al 2013; Langridge 2013; Robert et al 2013; Tien and Huy 2013).…”

Section: Criticism Of the Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Retracting Inconclusive Research: Lessons from the Séralini GM Maize Feeding Study

Resnik

2015

J Agric Environ Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In September 2012, Gilles-Eric Séralini and seven coauthors published an article in Food and Chemical Toxicology claiming that rats fed Roundup©-resistant genetically modified maize alone, genetically modified maize with Roundup©, or Roundup© for 2 years had a higher percentage of tumors and kidney and liver damage than normal controls. Shortly after this study was published, numerous scientists and several scientific organizations criticized the research as methodologically and ethically flawed. In January 2014, the journal retracted the article without the authors’ consent on the grounds that the research was inconclusive. In June 2014, Environmental Sciences Europe published a slightly modified version of the retracted paper. The publication, retraction and subsequent republication of the Séralini study raise important scientific and ethical issues for journal editors. Decisions to retract an article should be made on the basis of well-established policies. Articles should be retracted only for serious errors that undermine the reliability of the data or results, or for serious ethical lapses, such as research misconduct or mistreatment of animal or human subjects. Inconclusiveness, by itself, is not a sufficient reason for retracting an article, though a flawed study design might be. Retracted articles that are submitted for republication should undergo scientific review to ensure that they meet appropriate standards. Republished articles should be linked to the original, retracted publication. Journals that are reviewing studies with significant scientific and social implications should take special care to ensure that peer review is rigorous and fair.

show abstract

Comment on “Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize” by Séralini et al.

Cited by 10 publications

References 14 publications

A 90-day subchronic feeding study of genetically modified rice expressing Cry1Ab protein in Sprague–Dawley rats

A 90-day subchronic feeding study of genetically modified rice expressing Cry1Ab protein in Sprague–Dawley rats

A challenge to scientific integrity: a critique of the critics of the GMO rat study conducted by Gilles-Eric Séralini et al. (2012)

Retracting Inconclusive Research: Lessons from the Séralini GM Maize Feeding Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About