Invitation to a CRIIGEN press conference on the study of Prof. Séralini’s group
Tuesday 15 January 14:00 PM European Parliament 1, Avenue du Président Robert Schuman, 67000 – Strasbourg Room LOW N-1/201
Complaints of defamation filed against critics
Raw data released to a notary
Press release, CRIIGEN 11 January 2013
Source: gmoseralini.org
This study has become one of the most frequently accessed in the world since it was published in September 2012 (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 50 (2012), 4221-4231). The journal, one of the best toxicological journals, did not retract the study, despite relentless pressure to do so. Now it has published Séralini’s group’s detailed answers to critics (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2013, online).
The group has new experimental data on Roundup, which will soon be released.
Negative criticisms came from around 40 scientists or groups, including agencies responsible for GMO or pesticide authorisations. Most were subsequently revealed to have conflicts of interest, either directly with Monsanto Company, or with other commercial interests, or with bodies that had previously authorized the commercialization of these or similar products.[1]
Most of the critics are not specialists in the areas of pesticide toxicology or GMO risk assessment and do not publish papers on these topics. CRIIGEN and the research team have received statements of support and positive comments from more than 300 scientists from 33 countries across five continents. In our opinion these scientists are more representative of the scientific community at large.
CRIIGEN also welcomes the fact that the French food safety agency ANSES and several countries, including France, have recognized that long-term tests on GMOs are needed and that of the toxicity of pesticides has been underestimated. A project in this direction has been submitted to the French Parliament.
In addition, the Directorate General for Health and Consumers of the European Commission has disavowed EFSA’s opinion on the lack of necessity of long term toxicity testing.[2] Séralini’s study revealed the laxity of assessment which has allowed the commercialization of such products, on the part of agencies including EFSA. Their serious professional misconducts could endanger public health and lives.
Séralini’s team and CRIIGEN have just filed complaints of defamation against claims of “fraud” and “falsified data” that were respectively published in “Marianne” and “La Provence” by Jean-Claude Jaillette and Claude Allègre who is a member of the French association for plant biotechnologies (AFBV). AFBV and its president Marc Fellous were convicted of defamation against Séralini’s team in 2011. Other complaints of defamation are in process.
In 2013 Séralini’s team and CRIIGEN will launch other legal actions to force disclosure of hidden and poor quality toxicological data. These data were used by the regulatory agencies to enable the commercial release of the products that we tested, among others.
To set an example, we are arranging the formal delivery of the raw data of our last study to a notary. We will make these public as soon as the regulatory agencies or Monsanto do the same for their data, or when governments consent to publish the industry data.
Thus the scientific community will have full access to all the data on these industrial products. This will enable a true assessment, contradictory and transparent, and not a pseudo-assessment distorted by lobbies that are more concerned with protecting their own interests than with public health.
Notes
