Do you recall hearing of Professor Giles-Eric Seralini and his research team at the University of Caan in France? They offered photos of rats fed Monsanto GMO corn saturated with Roundup weed killer. That’s why the corn is genetically modified, to endure the most hazardous herbicide in the world.
Their study discovered that rats fed GMOs developed tumors and died prematurely. But that had not been the purpose of their research study. It was set up to examine the long term toxicity capacity of consuming Monsanto’s GMO corn together with the intrinsic exposure to Roundup.
After Seralini’s long term toxicity research study outcomes were publicized with screens of rats showing huge tumors, a tsunami of outrage from pro-GMO researchers and shill journalists got beneficial mainstream media (MSM) press.
The hundreds of scientists who safeguarded Seralini’s work were mainly neglected. Many fence caretakers were left confused and ready to side with the barking pets of the biotechnology industry.
Monsanto Influenced a Journal to Retract Seralini’s Report
This extremely publicized media attack of Seralini and his group was the air and sea attack to soften the defense of the small GMO truther island. Then the actual landing attack against that island’s real science was embarked by surreptitiously setting up previous Monsanto researcher Richard E. Goodman in a newly created biotech editorial position at the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT), an Elsevier publication.
That’s the journal where Seralini’s research study “Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize” had actually been initially peer examined and posted. With Goodman guiding the landing craft, the editor-in-chief of FCT, Wallace Hayes, got rid of Seralini’s paper from the journal in 2013, a complete year after it was at first peer evaluated and published.
Hayes admitted the study was not fraudulent or unreliable, but discussed that it was inconclusive. Honest defending researchers jumped on that a person, explaining that peer evaluated released studies are frequently undetermined, recommending “further studies”.
In case you’re believing I’m pulling the trigger on Goodman too rapidly, around that very same time a Brazilian research study showing Monsanto’s Bt corn insecticide starter genes do not break down in mammalian stomachs as declared by Monsanto, but endure undamaged to harm mammals’ blood cells was also pulled from FCT.
That research study has actually now been published in another journal. By the method, Seralini’s research was likewise quickly re-published in 2014 by another journal far eliminated from Monsanto’s invaders: Environmental Sciences Europe.
And by the way again, after some serious growling from international researchers directed at the FCT journal, here’s a 26 February 2015 update from Scientists for Worldwide Duty:
Critical changes have this year been made at the journal, Food and Chemical Toxicolgy, from which the Editor-in-Chief A. Wallace Hayes retracted the important paper by the Seralini team. The Editorial Board of the journal now has a new Editor-in-Chief, José L. Domingo, who has published papers showing that safety of GM crops is not an established fact; and the Editorial Board no longer includes Richard Goodman, the ex-Monsanto employee who became Associate Editor for Biotechnology not long before the Seralini paper was retracted.
Seralini Strikes Back Effectively.
Seralini and his research team weren’t entirely pleased with getting their researches republished and defending their work to a mostly unenthusiastic mainstream media. They formed a group called CRIIGEN, the acronym for Comité de Recherche et d’Information Indépendantes sur le Génie Génétique, or Committee for Independent Research and Info on Genetic Modification, and resisted.
Remember the attacks on Seralini et al focused on the tumors, which had a high visual media effect. However Seralini and group weren’t screening for cancerous impacts primarily. Their toxicity analysis concentrated on long term effects on liver and kidney health, where they did discover indisputable proof of gross damage.
Professor Seralini’s research study was a persistent toxicity research study, not a major carcinogenicity research study. Therefore he conservatively did refrain from doing an analytical analysis of the tumors and mortality findings. Rather he simply reported them, without drawing conclusive conclusions.
This was in line with the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) chronic toxicity method, which requires that any “lesions”, including growths, observed are recorded.
So Seralini and CRIIGEN conspired to attack rather than just safeguard, which they did well with assistance from many international researchers. They successfully challenged Marianne Publication and it’s feature reporter Jean-Claude Jaillet for openly asserting in 2012 that Seralini and his team were guilty of “scientific fraud in which the approach served to enhance established results”.
That same article likewise reported “researchers worldwide” had actually voiced “severe words” about Seralini’s long term (two years) toxicity research study on rats fed GMO Roundup-tolerant corn. Seralini and CRIIGEN, with the help of public attorneys, called notaires in France, Bernard Dartevelle and Cindy Gay won their suit against Marianne Magazine.
Then after a three year investigation ending on the 25th of November 2015, the High Court of Paris indicted Marc Fellous, among those charged in the original libel case previously. He simply occurred to be the chairmen of France’s Biomolecular Engineering Commission who had rubber stamped lots of GM items for consumption.
Details have not been openly exposed, however obviously Fellous has been charged with forgery and the use of forgery, utilizing a researcher’s trademark to “prove” Seralini and service were incorrect about their research study that concluded that Monsanto’s Roundup Ready corn was not safe for intake until further study was undertaken. Last judgement and sentencing is expected by early 2016.
The court’s examination found that American reporter Henry Miller via notoriously pro-GMO Forbes Publication had actually initiated the disparaging attacks. This Henry Miller is one of those mercenary attack hacks who has a history of working for markets that are harmful to the health and welfare of mankind and the world, consisting of the tobacco market. Slimy work, but it pays well.
Conclusion: Attacking the lying pro-GMO crowd and deceitful biotech market through the court system may be more plausible in Europe than here in the States, but it might be the only way to go against all things thought about GMO.
Thanks for taking the time to read this article. If you found this information helpful, please share it with your friends and family. Your support in our endeavor of sharing free information would be much appreciated.