Saturday, October 20, 2012

French Study Linking GMO to Cancer Is Flawed.

A major news item that was very widely spread over the internet and other news media recently suggested that a French study has determined that GMO corn fed to rats has increased the probability of developing cancer.
This story is full of twists and turns but my intension is only to make sure that you have all seen the most recent turn in this charade. Originally it was revealed that GMO corn and /or Roundup has increased the probability of developing cancer in rats.


 When the news was first released it was done in a very highly "strange" procedure. A few journalists were given the results provided that they would sign a written agreement that prohibits them from asking any outsiders for verification of the results. That is highly uncommon in scientific studies. Anyway,  a number of top French Scientific organizations suspected foul play because of the procedure and also because of the language used in the report. The six French Scientific Academies issued a joint statement which rejects all the findings of the study in question. I will spare you the exact translation of the statement but share with you an explanation of what has transpired as reported by Agence France:

“This work does not enable any reliable conclusion to be drawn,” they said, adding bluntly that the affair helped “spread fear among the public.” The joint statement—an extremely rare event in French science—was signed by the national academies of agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, sciences, technology and veterinary studies. It was sparked by research published in September that said rats fed with so-called NK603 corn and/or doses of Roundup herbicide developed tumors….
Two fast-track official investigations into the study, ordered by the government, are due to be unveiled on Monday.
The academies’ statement said: “Given the numerous gaps in methods and interpretation, the data presented in this article cannot challenge previous studies which have concluded that NK603 corn is harmless from the health point of view, as are, more generally, genetically modified plants that have been authorised for consumption by animals and humans.” In withering terms, it dismissed the study as “a scientific non-event.” “Hyping the reputation of a scientist or a team is a serious misdemeanour when it helps to spread fear among the public that is not based on any firm conclusion,” the academies said.
And let me leave you with the conclusion of the European Food Safety Authority on this subject:

"Conclusions cannot be drawn on the difference in tumour incidence between the treatment groups on the basis of the design, the analysis and the results as reported in the Séralini et al. (2012) publication. In particular, Séralini et al. (2012) draw conclusions on the incidence of tumours based on 10 rats per treatment per sex which is an insufficient number of animals to distinguish between specific treatment effects and chance occurrences of tumours in rats. Considering that the study as reported in the Séralini et al. (2012) publication is of inadequate design, analysis and reporting, EFSA finds that it is of insufficient scientific quality for safety assessment."

 (hat tip to Dot Earth for some of the above material)
The EFSA said an initial review showed that the "design, reporting and analysis of the study ... are inadequate," meaning it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound." Given these shortcomings, the EFSA called on the author of the study, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini, to provide additional information before a second, final review is completed by the end of this month. Seralini's team at France's University of Caen found that rats develop tumours when fed US agribusiness giant Monsanto's NK603 corn, or when exposed to one of the company's weedkillers used with it, containing glyphosate. The scientist insisted Thursday he would not give the EFSA any additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment. "It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said. "In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini told AFP. NK603 was developed by Monsanto to make it resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, enabling farmers to use the weedkiller just once in the crop's life-cycle, enabling substantial savings. Seralini and his team say their experiment in GM food is the first to follow rats through their lifespan, as opposed to just 90 days, but other experts have also questioned its methodology, results and relevance to humans. EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), said that "based on the information published by the authors ... it does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate." In May, the EFSA said a temporary French ban on another Monsanto corn, MON810, was not properly based on scientific evidence. "Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment," EFSA said of the French position. France, like many EU countries, has a long record of opposition to GM foods but the pressures on farmers in terms of cost are immense, driving their increasing use, especially in emerging economies such as China and Brazil. EFSA listed a series of concerns it had with Seralini's findings, among them that the type of rat used "in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. "This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors." Environmental groups attacked the EFSA action, saying it was not doing enough on its own to test GM foods while condemning the work of others. The "EFSA fails to convince us that they are putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness biotech industry," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth. "Instead of dismissing peer-reviewed independent research they should be asking themselves why they don't demand long term safety tests for genetically modified foods," Schimpf said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-eu-french-scientist-linking-gm.html#jCp
The EFSA said an initial review showed that the "design, reporting and analysis of the study ... are inadequate," meaning it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound." Given these shortcomings, the EFSA called on the author of the study, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini, to provide additional information before a second, final review is completed by the end of this month. Seralini's team at France's University of Caen found that rats develop tumours when fed US agribusiness giant Monsanto's NK603 corn, or when exposed to one of the company's weedkillers used with it, containing glyphosate. The scientist insisted Thursday he would not give the EFSA any additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment. "It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said. "In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini told AFP. NK603 was developed by Monsanto to make it resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, enabling farmers to use the weedkiller just once in the crop's life-cycle, enabling substantial savings. Seralini and his team say their experiment in GM food is the first to follow rats through their lifespan, as opposed to just 90 days, but other experts have also questioned its methodology, results and relevance to humans. EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), said that "based on the information published by the authors ... it does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate." In May, the EFSA said a temporary French ban on another Monsanto corn, MON810, was not properly based on scientific evidence. "Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment," EFSA said of the French position. France, like many EU countries, has a long record of opposition to GM foods but the pressures on farmers in terms of cost are immense, driving their increasing use, especially in emerging economies such as China and Brazil. EFSA listed a series of concerns it had with Seralini's findings, among them that the type of rat used "in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. "This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors." Environmental groups attacked the EFSA action, saying it was not doing enough on its own to test GM foods while condemning the work of others. The "EFSA fails to convince us that they are putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness biotech industry," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth. "Instead of dismissing peer-reviewed independent research they should be asking themselves why they don't demand long term safety tests for genetically modified foods," Schimpf said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-eu-french-scientist-linking-gm.html#jCp
The EFSA said an initial review showed that the "design, reporting and analysis of the study ... are inadequate," meaning it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound." Given these shortcomings, the EFSA called on the author of the study, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini, to provide additional information before a second, final review is completed by the end of this month. Seralini's team at France's University of Caen found that rats develop tumours when fed US agribusiness giant Monsanto's NK603 corn, or when exposed to one of the company's weedkillers used with it, containing glyphosate. The scientist insisted Thursday he would not give the EFSA any additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment. "It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said. "In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini told AFP. NK603 was developed by Monsanto to make it resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, enabling farmers to use the weedkiller just once in the crop's life-cycle, enabling substantial savings. Seralini and his team say their experiment in GM food is the first to follow rats through their lifespan, as opposed to just 90 days, but other experts have also questioned its methodology, results and relevance to humans. EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), said that "based on the information published by the authors ... it does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate." In May, the EFSA said a temporary French ban on another Monsanto corn, MON810, was not properly based on scientific evidence. "Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment," EFSA said of the French position. France, like many EU countries, has a long record of opposition to GM foods but the pressures on farmers in terms of cost are immense, driving their increasing use, especially in emerging economies such as China and Brazil. EFSA listed a series of concerns it had with Seralini's findings, among them that the type of rat used "in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. "This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors." Environmental groups attacked the EFSA action, saying it was not doing enough on its own to test GM foods while condemning the work of others. The "EFSA fails to convince us that they are putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness biotech industry," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth. "Instead of dismissing peer-reviewed independent research they should be asking themselves why they don't demand long term safety tests for genetically modified foods," Schimpf said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-eu-french-scientist-linking-gm.html#jCp
The EFSA said an initial review showed that the "design, reporting and analysis of the study ... are inadequate," meaning it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound." Given these shortcomings, the EFSA called on the author of the study, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini, to provide additional information before a second, final review is completed by the end of this month. Seralini's team at France's University of Caen found that rats develop tumours when fed US agribusiness giant Monsanto's NK603 corn, or when exposed to one of the company's weedkillers used with it, containing glyphosate. The scientist insisted Thursday he would not give the EFSA any additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment. "It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said. "In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini told AFP. NK603 was developed by Monsanto to make it resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, enabling farmers to use the weedkiller just once in the crop's life-cycle, enabling substantial savings. Seralini and his team say their experiment in GM food is the first to follow rats through their lifespan, as opposed to just 90 days, but other experts have also questioned its methodology, results and relevance to humans. EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), said that "based on the information published by the authors ... it does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate." In May, the EFSA said a temporary French ban on another Monsanto corn, MON810, was not properly based on scientific evidence. "Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment," EFSA said of the French position. France, like many EU countries, has a long record of opposition to GM foods but the pressures on farmers in terms of cost are immense, driving their increasing use, especially in emerging economies such as China and Brazil. EFSA listed a series of concerns it had with Seralini's findings, among them that the type of rat used "in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. "This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors." Environmental groups attacked the EFSA action, saying it was not doing enough on its own to test GM foods while condemning the work of others. The "EFSA fails to convince us that they are putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness biotech industry," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth. "Instead of dismissing peer-reviewed independent research they should be asking themselves why they don't demand long term safety tests for genetically modified foods," Schimpf said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-eu-french-scientist-linking-gm.html#jCp
The EFSA said an initial review showed that the "design, reporting and analysis of the study ... are inadequate," meaning it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound." Given these shortcomings, the EFSA called on the author of the study, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini, to provide additional information before a second, final review is completed by the end of this month. Seralini's team at France's University of Caen found that rats develop tumours when fed US agribusiness giant Monsanto's NK603 corn, or when exposed to one of the company's weedkillers used with it, containing glyphosate. The scientist insisted Thursday he would not give the EFSA any additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment. "It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said. "In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini told AFP. NK603 was developed by Monsanto to make it resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, enabling farmers to use the weedkiller just once in the crop's life-cycle, enabling substantial savings. Seralini and his team say their experiment in GM food is the first to follow rats through their lifespan, as opposed to just 90 days, but other experts have also questioned its methodology, results and relevance to humans. EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), said that "based on the information published by the authors ... it does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate." In May, the EFSA said a temporary French ban on another Monsanto corn, MON810, was not properly based on scientific evidence. "Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment," EFSA said of the French position. France, like many EU countries, has a long record of opposition to GM foods but the pressures on farmers in terms of cost are immense, driving their increasing use, especially in emerging economies such as China and Brazil. EFSA listed a series of concerns it had with Seralini's findings, among them that the type of rat used "in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. "This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors." Environmental groups attacked the EFSA action, saying it was not doing enough on its own to test GM foods while condemning the work of others. The "EFSA fails to convince us that they are putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness biotech industry," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth. "Instead of dismissing peer-reviewed independent research they should be asking themselves why they don't demand long term safety tests for genetically modified foods," Schimpf said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-eu-french-scientist-linking-gm.html#jCp
The EFSA said an initial review showed that the "design, reporting and analysis of the study ... are inadequate," meaning it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound." Given these shortcomings, the EFSA called on the author of the study, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini, to provide additional information before a second, final review is completed by the end of this month. Seralini's team at France's University of Caen found that rats develop tumours when fed US agribusiness giant Monsanto's NK603 corn, or when exposed to one of the company's weedkillers used with it, containing glyphosate. The scientist insisted Thursday he would not give the EFSA any additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment. "It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said. "In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini told AFP. NK603 was developed by Monsanto to make it resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, enabling farmers to use the weedkiller just once in the crop's life-cycle, enabling substantial savings. Seralini and his team say their experiment in GM food is the first to follow rats through their lifespan, as opposed to just 90 days, but other experts have also questioned its methodology, results and relevance to humans. EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), said that "based on the information published by the authors ... it does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate." In May, the EFSA said a temporary French ban on another Monsanto corn, MON810, was not properly based on scientific evidence. "Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment," EFSA said of the French position. France, like many EU countries, has a long record of opposition to GM foods but the pressures on farmers in terms of cost are immense, driving their increasing use, especially in emerging economies such as China and Brazil. EFSA listed a series of concerns it had with Seralini's findings, among them that the type of rat used "in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. "This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors." Environmental groups attacked the EFSA action, saying it was not doing enough on its own to test GM foods while condemning the work of others. The "EFSA fails to convince us that they are putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness biotech industry," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth. "Instead of dismissing peer-reviewed independent research they should be asking themselves why they don't demand long term safety tests for genetically modified foods," Schimpf said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-eu-french-scientist-linking-gm.html#jCp
The EFSA said an initial review showed that the "design, reporting and analysis of the study ... are inadequate," meaning it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound." Given these shortcomings, the EFSA called on the author of the study, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini, to provide additional information before a second, final review is completed by the end of this month. Seralini's team at France's University of Caen found that rats develop tumours when fed US agribusiness giant Monsanto's NK603 corn, or when exposed to one of the company's weedkillers used with it, containing glyphosate. The scientist insisted Thursday he would not give the EFSA any additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment. "It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said. "In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini told AFP. NK603 was developed by Monsanto to make it resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, enabling farmers to use the weedkiller just once in the crop's life-cycle, enabling substantial savings. Seralini and his team say their experiment in GM food is the first to follow rats through their lifespan, as opposed to just 90 days, but other experts have also questioned its methodology, results and relevance to humans. EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), said that "based on the information published by the authors ... it does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate." In May, the EFSA said a temporary French ban on another Monsanto corn, MON810, was not properly based on scientific evidence. "Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment," EFSA said of the French position. France, like many EU countries, has a long record of opposition to GM foods but the pressures on farmers in terms of cost are immense, driving their increasing use, especially in emerging economies such as China and Brazil. EFSA listed a series of concerns it had with Seralini's findings, among them that the type of rat used "in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. "This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors." Environmental groups attacked the EFSA action, saying it was not doing enough on its own to test GM foods while condemning the work of others. The "EFSA fails to convince us that they are putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness biotech industry," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth. "Instead of dismissing peer-reviewed independent research they should be asking themselves why they don't demand long term safety tests for genetically modified foods," Schimpf said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-eu-french-scientist-linking-gm.html#jCp
The EFSA said an initial review showed that the "design, reporting and analysis of the study ... are inadequate," meaning it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound." Given these shortcomings, the EFSA called on the author of the study, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini, to provide additional information before a second, final review is completed by the end of this month. Seralini's team at France's University of Caen found that rats develop tumours when fed US agribusiness giant Monsanto's NK603 corn, or when exposed to one of the company's weedkillers used with it, containing glyphosate. The scientist insisted Thursday he would not give the EFSA any additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment. "It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said. "In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini told AFP. NK603 was developed by Monsanto to make it resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, enabling farmers to use the weedkiller just once in the crop's life-cycle, enabling substantial savings. Seralini and his team say their experiment in GM food is the first to follow rats through their lifespan, as opposed to just 90 days, but other experts have also questioned its methodology, results and relevance to humans. EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), said that "based on the information published by the authors ... it does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate." In May, the EFSA said a temporary French ban on another Monsanto corn, MON810, was not properly based on scientific evidence. "Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment," EFSA said of the French position. France, like many EU countries, has a long record of opposition to GM foods but the pressures on farmers in terms of cost are immense, driving their increasing use, especially in emerging economies such as China and Brazil. EFSA listed a series of concerns it had with Seralini's findings, among them that the type of rat used "in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. "This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors." Environmental groups attacked the EFSA action, saying it was not doing enough on its own to test GM foods while condemning the work of others. The "EFSA fails to convince us that they are putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness biotech industry," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth. "Instead of dismissing peer-reviewed independent research they should be asking themselves why they don't demand long term safety tests for genetically modified foods," Schimpf said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-eu-french-scientist-linking-gm.html#jCp
The EFSA said an initial review showed that the "design, reporting and analysis of the study ... are inadequate," meaning it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound." Given these shortcomings, the EFSA called on the author of the study, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini, to provide additional information before a second, final review is completed by the end of this month. Seralini's team at France's University of Caen found that rats develop tumours when fed US agribusiness giant Monsanto's NK603 corn, or when exposed to one of the company's weedkillers used with it, containing glyphosate. The scientist insisted Thursday he would not give the EFSA any additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment. "It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said. "In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini told AFP. NK603 was developed by Monsanto to make it resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, enabling farmers to use the weedkiller just once in the crop's life-cycle, enabling substantial savings. Seralini and his team say their experiment in GM food is the first to follow rats through their lifespan, as opposed to just 90 days, but other experts have also questioned its methodology, results and relevance to humans. EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), said that "based on the information published by the authors ... it does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate." In May, the EFSA said a temporary French ban on another Monsanto corn, MON810, was not properly based on scientific evidence. "Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment," EFSA said of the French position. France, like many EU countries, has a long record of opposition to GM foods but the pressures on farmers in terms of cost are immense, driving their increasing use, especially in emerging economies such as China and Brazil. EFSA listed a series of concerns it had with Seralini's findings, among them that the type of rat used "in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. "This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors." Environmental groups attacked the EFSA action, saying it was not doing enough on its own to test GM foods while condemning the work of others. The "EFSA fails to convince us that they are putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness biotech industry," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth. "Instead of dismissing peer-reviewed independent research they should be asking themselves why they don't demand long term safety tests for genetically modified foods," Schimpf said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-eu-french-scientist-linking-gm.html#jCp
The EFSA said an initial review showed that the "design, reporting and analysis of the study ... are inadequate," meaning it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound." Given these shortcomings, the EFSA called on the author of the study, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini, to provide additional information before a second, final review is completed by the end of this month. Seralini's team at France's University of Caen found that rats develop tumours when fed US agribusiness giant Monsanto's NK603 corn, or when exposed to one of the company's weedkillers used with it, containing glyphosate. The scientist insisted Thursday he would not give the EFSA any additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment. "It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said. "In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini told AFP. NK603 was developed by Monsanto to make it resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, enabling farmers to use the weedkiller just once in the crop's life-cycle, enabling substantial savings. Seralini and his team say their experiment in GM food is the first to follow rats through their lifespan, as opposed to just 90 days, but other experts have also questioned its methodology, results and relevance to humans. EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), said that "based on the information published by the authors ... it does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate." In May, the EFSA said a temporary French ban on another Monsanto corn, MON810, was not properly based on scientific evidence. "Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment," EFSA said of the French position. France, like many EU countries, has a long record of opposition to GM foods but the pressures on farmers in terms of cost are immense, driving their increasing use, especially in emerging economies such as China and Brazil. EFSA listed a series of concerns it had with Seralini's findings, among them that the type of rat used "in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. "This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors." Environmental groups attacked the EFSA action, saying it was not doing enough on its own to test GM foods while condemning the work of others. The "EFSA fails to convince us that they are putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness biotech industry," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth. "Instead of dismissing peer-reviewed independent research they should be asking themselves why they don't demand long term safety tests for genetically modified foods," Schimpf said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-eu-french-scientist-linking-gm.html#jCp
The EFSA said an initial review showed that the "design, reporting and analysis of the study ... are inadequate," meaning it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound." Given these shortcomings, the EFSA called on the author of the study, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini, to provide additional information before a second, final review is completed by the end of this month. Seralini's team at France's University of Caen found that rats develop tumours when fed US agribusiness giant Monsanto's NK603 corn, or when exposed to one of the company's weedkillers used with it, containing glyphosate. The scientist insisted Thursday he would not give the EFSA any additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment. "It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said. "In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini told AFP. NK603 was developed by Monsanto to make it resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, enabling farmers to use the weedkiller just once in the crop's life-cycle, enabling substantial savings. Seralini and his team say their experiment in GM food is the first to follow rats through their lifespan, as opposed to just 90 days, but other experts have also questioned its methodology, results and relevance to humans. EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), said that "based on the information published by the authors ... it does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate." In May, the EFSA said a temporary French ban on another Monsanto corn, MON810, was not properly based on scientific evidence. "Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment," EFSA said of the French position. France, like many EU countries, has a long record of opposition to GM foods but the pressures on farmers in terms of cost are immense, driving their increasing use, especially in emerging economies such as China and Brazil. EFSA listed a series of concerns it had with Seralini's findings, among them that the type of rat used "in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. "This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors." Environmental groups attacked the EFSA action, saying it was not doing enough on its own to test GM foods while condemning the work of others. The "EFSA fails to convince us that they are putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness biotech industry," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth. "Instead of dismissing peer-reviewed independent research they should be asking themselves why they don't demand long term safety tests for genetically modified foods," Schimpf said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-eu-french-scientist-linking-gm.html#jCp
The EFSA said an initial review showed that the "design, reporting and analysis of the study ... are inadequate," meaning it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound." Given these shortcomings, the EFSA called on the author of the study, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini, to provide additional information before a second, final review is completed by the end of this month. Seralini's team at France's University of Caen found that rats develop tumours when fed US agribusiness giant Monsanto's NK603 corn, or when exposed to one of the company's weedkillers used with it, containing glyphosate. The scientist insisted Thursday he would not give the EFSA any additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment. "It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said. "In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini told AFP. NK603 was developed by Monsanto to make it resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, enabling farmers to use the weedkiller just once in the crop's life-cycle, enabling substantial savings. Seralini and his team say their experiment in GM food is the first to follow rats through their lifespan, as opposed to just 90 days, but other experts have also questioned its methodology, results and relevance to humans. EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), said that "based on the information published by the authors ... it does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate." In May, the EFSA said a temporary French ban on another Monsanto corn, MON810, was not properly based on scientific evidence. "Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment," EFSA said of the French position. France, like many EU countries, has a long record of opposition to GM foods but the pressures on farmers in terms of cost are immense, driving their increasing use, especially in emerging economies such as China and Brazil. EFSA listed a series of concerns it had with Seralini's findings, among them that the type of rat used "in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. "This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors." Environmental groups attacked the EFSA action, saying it was not doing enough on its own to test GM foods while condemning the work of others. The "EFSA fails to convince us that they are putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness biotech industry," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth. "Instead of dismissing peer-reviewed independent research they should be asking themselves why they don't demand long term safety tests for genetically modified foods," Schimpf said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-eu-french-scientist-linking-gm.html#jCp
The EFSA said an initial review showed that the "design, reporting and analysis of the study ... are inadequate," meaning it could not "regard the authors' conclusions as scientifically sound." Given these shortcomings, the EFSA called on the author of the study, French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini, to provide additional information before a second, final review is completed by the end of this month. Seralini's team at France's University of Caen found that rats develop tumours when fed US agribusiness giant Monsanto's NK603 corn, or when exposed to one of the company's weedkillers used with it, containing glyphosate. The scientist insisted Thursday he would not give the EFSA any additional information until it first detailed the basis of its own assessment. "It is absolutely scandalous that (EFSA) keeps secret the information on which they based their evaluation" of NK603 and the pesticide, he said. "In any event, we will not give them anything. We will put the information in the public domain when they do," Seralini told AFP. NK603 was developed by Monsanto to make it resistant to the Monsanto herbicide Roundup, enabling farmers to use the weedkiller just once in the crop's life-cycle, enabling substantial savings. Seralini and his team say their experiment in GM food is the first to follow rats through their lifespan, as opposed to just 90 days, but other experts have also questioned its methodology, results and relevance to humans. EFSA, which reviews the use and authorisation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), said that "based on the information published by the authors ... it does not see a need to re-examine its previous safety evaluation of maize NK603 nor to consider these findings in the ongoing assessment of glyphosate." In May, the EFSA said a temporary French ban on another Monsanto corn, MON810, was not properly based on scientific evidence. "Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment," EFSA said of the French position. France, like many EU countries, has a long record of opposition to GM foods but the pressures on farmers in terms of cost are immense, driving their increasing use, especially in emerging economies such as China and Brazil. EFSA listed a series of concerns it had with Seralini's findings, among them that the type of rat used "in the two-year study is prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of approximately two years. "This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this strain, regardless of any treatment. This is neither taken into account nor discussed by the authors." Environmental groups attacked the EFSA action, saying it was not doing enough on its own to test GM foods while condemning the work of others. The "EFSA fails to convince us that they are putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness biotech industry," said Mute Schimpf of Friends of the Earth. "Instead of dismissing peer-reviewed independent research they should be asking themselves why they don't demand long term safety tests for genetically modified foods," Schimpf said.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-eu-french-scientist-linking-gm.html#jCpv

Treatment Outcomes - www.mskcc.org "This work does not enable any reliable conclusion to be drawn," they said, adding bluntly that the affair helped "spread fear among the public." The joint statement—an extremely rare event in French science—was signed by the national academies of agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, sciences, technology and veterinary studies. It was sparked by research published in September that said rats fed with so-called NK603 corn and/or doses of Roundup herbicide developed tumours. The paper, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini at the University of Caen, unleashed a storm in Europe, where GM crops are a highly sensitive issue. Critics accused Seralini of manipulating the media to boost the impact of his findings, branded his experiments as shoddy or fraught with gaps or bias. Two fast-track official investigations into the study, ordered by the government, are due to be unveiled on Monday. The academies' statement said: "Given the numerous gaps in methods and interpretation, the data presented in this article cannot challenge previous studies which have concluded that NK603 corn is harmless from the health point of view, as are, more generally, genetically modified plants that have been authorised for consumption by animals and humans." In withering terms, it dismissed the study as "a scientific non-event." "Hyping the reputation of a scientist or a team is a serious misdemeanour when it helps to spread fear among the public that is not based on any firm conclusion," the academies said. NK603 is a corn, also called maize, made by US agribusiness giant Monsanto.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-linking-gm-corn-cancer-non-event.html#jCp
Treatment Outcomes - www.mskcc.org "This work does not enable any reliable conclusion to be drawn," they said, adding bluntly that the affair helped "spread fear among the public." The joint statement—an extremely rare event in French science—was signed by the national academies of agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, sciences, technology and veterinary studies. It was sparked by research published in September that said rats fed with so-called NK603 corn and/or doses of Roundup herbicide developed tumours. The paper, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini at the University of Caen, unleashed a storm in Europe, where GM crops are a highly sensitive issue. Critics accused Seralini of manipulating the media to boost the impact of his findings, branded his experiments as shoddy or fraught with gaps or bias. Two fast-track official investigations into the study, ordered by the government, are due to be unveiled on Monday. The academies' statement said: "Given the numerous gaps in methods and interpretation, the data presented in this article cannot challenge previous studies which have concluded that NK603 corn is harmless from the health point of view, as are, more generally, genetically modified plants that have been authorised for consumption by animals and humans." In withering terms, it dismissed the study as "a scientific non-event." "Hyping the reputation of a scientist or a team is a serious misdemeanour when it helps to spread fear among the public that is not based on any firm conclusion," the academies said. NK603 is a corn, also called maize, made by US agribusiness giant Monsanto.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-linking-gm-corn-cancer-non-event.html#jCpv
Treatment Outcomes - www.mskcc.org "This work does not enable any reliable conclusion to be drawn," they said, adding bluntly that the affair helped "spread fear among the public." The joint statement—an extremely rare event in French science—was signed by the national academies of agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, sciences, technology and veterinary studies. It was sparked by research published in September that said rats fed with so-called NK603 corn and/or doses of Roundup herbicide developed tumours. The paper, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini at the University of Caen, unleashed a storm in Europe, where GM crops are a highly sensitive issue. Critics accused Seralini of manipulating the media to boost the impact of his findings, branded his experiments as shoddy or fraught with gaps or bias. Two fast-track official investigations into the study, ordered by the government, are due to be unveiled on Monday. The academies' statement said: "Given the numerous gaps in methods and interpretation, the data presented in this article cannot challenge previous studies which have concluded that NK603 corn is harmless from the health point of view, as are, more generally, genetically modified plants that have been authorised for consumption by animals and humans." In withering terms, it dismissed the study as "a scientific non-event." "Hyping the reputation of a scientist or a team is a serious misdemeanour when it helps to spread fear among the public that is not based on any firm conclusion," the academies said. NK603 is a corn, also called maize, made by US agribusiness giant Monsanto.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-linking-gm-corn-cancer-non-event.html#jCp
A controversial study that linked genetically modified corn to cancer in lab rats is a "scientific non-event," six French scientific academies said on Friday. Ads by Google Diagnosed with Cancer - Memorial Sloan-Kettering for better Cancer Treatment Outcomes - www.mskcc.org "This work does not enable any reliable conclusion to be drawn," they said, adding bluntly that the affair helped "spread fear among the public." The joint statement—an extremely rare event in French science—was signed by the national academies of agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, sciences, technology and veterinary studies. It was sparked by research published in September that said rats fed with so-called NK603 corn and/or doses of Roundup herbicide developed tumours. The paper, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini at the University of Caen, unleashed a storm in Europe, where GM crops are a highly sensitive issue. Critics accused Seralini of manipulating the media to boost the impact of his findings, branded his experiments as shoddy or fraught with gaps or bias. Two fast-track official investigations into the study, ordered by the government, are due to be unveiled on Monday. The academies' statement said: "Given the numerous gaps in methods and interpretation, the data presented in this article cannot challenge previous studies which have concluded that NK603 corn is harmless from the health point of view, as are, more generally, genetically modified plants that have been authorised for consumption by animals and humans." In withering terms, it dismissed the study as "a scientific non-event." "Hyping the reputation of a scientist or a team is a serious misdemeanour when it helps to spread fear among the public that is not based on any firm conclusion," the academies said. NK603 is a corn, also called maize, made by US agribusiness giant Monsanto. Genetically modified corn cobs are seen at a corn field Enlarge Genetically modified corn cobs are seen at a corn field, west of Cairo, 2008. A controversial study that linked genetically modified corn to cancer in lab rats is a "scientific non-event," six French scientific academies said. It has been engineered to make it resistant to Monsanto's herbicide Roundup. This enables farmers to douse fields with the weedkiller in a single go, thus offering substantial savings. The study was published on September 19 in a peer-reviewed specialist journal called Food and Chemical Toxicology. Seralini is a well-known opponent of GM crops, and his research was funded in part by an alliance comprising anti-GM campaigners and supermarket chains that have invested heavily in organic food.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-linking-gm-corn-cancer-non-event.html#jCpv
A controversial study that linked genetically modified corn to cancer in lab rats is a "scientific non-event," six French scientific academies said on Friday. Ads by Google Diagnosed with Cancer - Memorial Sloan-Kettering for better Cancer Treatment Outcomes - www.mskcc.org "This work does not enable any reliable conclusion to be drawn," they said, adding bluntly that the affair helped "spread fear among the public." The joint statement—an extremely rare event in French science—was signed by the national academies of agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, sciences, technology and veterinary studies. It was sparked by research published in September that said rats fed with so-called NK603 corn and/or doses of Roundup herbicide developed tumours. The paper, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini at the University of Caen, unleashed a storm in Europe, where GM crops are a highly sensitive issue. Critics accused Seralini of manipulating the media to boost the impact of his findings, branded his experiments as shoddy or fraught with gaps or bias. Two fast-track official investigations into the study, ordered by the government, are due to be unveiled on Monday. The academies' statement said: "Given the numerous gaps in methods and interpretation, the data presented in this article cannot challenge previous studies which have concluded that NK603 corn is harmless from the health point of view, as are, more generally, genetically modified plants that have been authorised for consumption by animals and humans." In withering terms, it dismissed the study as "a scientific non-event." "Hyping the reputation of a scientist or a team is a serious misdemeanour when it helps to spread fear among the public that is not based on any firm conclusion," the academies said. NK603 is a corn, also called maize, made by US agribusiness giant Monsanto. Genetically modified corn cobs are seen at a corn field Enlarge Genetically modified corn cobs are seen at a corn field, west of Cairo, 2008. A controversial study that linked genetically modified corn to cancer in lab rats is a "scientific non-event," six French scientific academies said. It has been engineered to make it resistant to Monsanto's herbicide Roundup. This enables farmers to douse fields with the weedkiller in a single go, thus offering substantial savings. The study was published on September 19 in a peer-reviewed specialist journal called Food and Chemical Toxicology. Seralini is a well-known opponent of GM crops, and his research was funded in part by an alliance comprising anti-GM campaigners and supermarket chains that have invested heavily in organic food.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-linking-gm-corn-cancer-non-event.html#jCpv
A controversial study that linked genetically modified corn to cancer in lab rats is a "scientific non-event," six French scientific academies said on Friday. Ads by Google Diagnosed with Cancer - Memorial Sloan-Kettering for better Cancer Treatment Outcomes - www.mskcc.org "This work does not enable any reliable conclusion to be drawn," they said, adding bluntly that the affair helped "spread fear among the public." The joint statement—an extremely rare event in French science—was signed by the national academies of agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, sciences, technology and veterinary studies. It was sparked by research published in September that said rats fed with so-called NK603 corn and/or doses of Roundup herbicide developed tumours. The paper, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini at the University of Caen, unleashed a storm in Europe, where GM crops are a highly sensitive issue. Critics accused Seralini of manipulating the media to boost the impact of his findings, branded his experiments as shoddy or fraught with gaps or bias. Two fast-track official investigations into the study, ordered by the government, are due to be unveiled on Monday. The academies' statement said: "Given the numerous gaps in methods and interpretation, the data presented in this article cannot challenge previous studies which have concluded that NK603 corn is harmless from the health point of view, as are, more generally, genetically modified plants that have been authorised for consumption by animals and humans." In withering terms, it dismissed the study as "a scientific non-event." "Hyping the reputation of a scientist or a team is a serious misdemeanour when it helps to spread fear among the public that is not based on any firm conclusion," the academies said. NK603 is a corn, also called maize, made by US agribusiness giant Monsanto. Genetically modified corn cobs are seen at a corn field Enlarge Genetically modified corn cobs are seen at a corn field, west of Cairo, 2008. A controversial study that linked genetically modified corn to cancer in lab rats is a "scientific non-event," six French scientific academies said. It has been engineered to make it resistant to Monsanto's herbicide Roundup. This enables farmers to douse fields with the weedkiller in a single go, thus offering substantial savings. The study was published on September 19 in a peer-reviewed specialist journal called Food and Chemical Toxicology. Seralini is a well-known opponent of GM crops, and his research was funded in part by an alliance comprising anti-GM campaigners and supermarket chains that have invested heavily in organic food.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-linking-gm-corn-cancer-non-event.html#jCp
A controversial study that linked genetically modified corn to cancer in lab rats is a "scientific non-event," six French scientific academies said on Friday. Ads by Google Diagnosed with Cancer - Memorial Sloan-Kettering for better Cancer Treatment Outcomes - www.mskcc.org "This work does not enable any reliable conclusion to be drawn," they said, adding bluntly that the affair helped "spread fear among the public." The joint statement—an extremely rare event in French science—was signed by the national academies of agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, sciences, technology and veterinary studies. It was sparked by research published in September that said rats fed with so-called NK603 corn and/or doses of Roundup herbicide developed tumours. The paper, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini at the University of Caen, unleashed a storm in Europe, where GM crops are a highly sensitive issue. Critics accused Seralini of manipulating the media to boost the impact of his findings, branded his experiments as shoddy or fraught with gaps or bias. Two fast-track official investigations into the study, ordered by the government, are due to be unveiled on Monday. The academies' statement said: "Given the numerous gaps in methods and interpretation, the data presented in this article cannot challenge previous studies which have concluded that NK603 corn is harmless from the health point of view, as are, more generally, genetically modified plants that have been authorised for consumption by animals and humans." In withering terms, it dismissed the study as "a scientific non-event." "Hyping the reputation of a scientist or a team is a serious misdemeanour when it helps to spread fear among the public that is not based on any firm conclusion," the academies said. NK603 is a corn, also called maize, made by US agribusiness giant Monsanto. Genetically modified corn cobs are seen at a corn field Enlarge Genetically modified corn cobs are seen at a corn field, west of Cairo, 2008. A controversial study that linked genetically modified corn to cancer in lab rats is a "scientific non-event," six French scientific academies said. It has been engineered to make it resistant to Monsanto's herbicide Roundup. This enables farmers to douse fields with the weedkiller in a single go, thus offering substantial savings. The study was published on September 19 in a peer-reviewed specialist journal called Food and Chemical Toxicology. Seralini is a well-known opponent of GM crops, and his research was funded in part by an alliance comprising anti-GM campaigners and supermarket chains that have invested heavily in organic food.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-linking-gm-corn-cancer-non-event.html#jCp
A controversial study that linked genetically modified corn to cancer in lab rats is a "scientific non-event," six French scientific academies said on Friday. Ads by Google Diagnosed with Cancer - Memorial Sloan-Kettering for better Cancer Treatment Outcomes - www.mskcc.org "This work does not enable any reliable conclusion to be drawn," they said, adding bluntly that the affair helped "spread fear among the public." The joint statement—an extremely rare event in French science—was signed by the national academies of agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, sciences, technology and veterinary studies. It was sparked by research published in September that said rats fed with so-called NK603 corn and/or doses of Roundup herbicide developed tumours. The paper, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini at the University of Caen, unleashed a storm in Europe, where GM crops are a highly sensitive issue. Critics accused Seralini of manipulating the media to boost the impact of his findings, branded his experiments as shoddy or fraught with gaps or bias. Two fast-track official investigations into the study, ordered by the government, are due to be unveiled on Monday. The academies' statement said: "Given the numerous gaps in methods and interpretation, the data presented in this article cannot challenge previous studies which have concluded that NK603 corn is harmless from the health point of view, as are, more generally, genetically modified plants that have been authorised for consumption by animals and humans." In withering terms, it dismissed the study as "a scientific non-event." "Hyping the reputation of a scientist or a team is a serious misdemeanour when it helps to spread fear among the public that is not based on any firm conclusion," the academies said. NK603 is a corn, also called maize, made by US agribusiness giant Monsanto. Genetically modified corn cobs are seen at a corn field Enlarge Genetically modified corn cobs are seen at a corn field, west of Cairo, 2008. A controversial study that linked genetically modified corn to cancer in lab rats is a "scientific non-event," six French scientific academies said. It has been engineered to make it resistant to Monsanto's herbicide Roundup. This enables farmers to douse fields with the weedkiller in a single go, thus offering substantial savings. The study was published on September 19 in a peer-reviewed specialist journal called Food and Chemical Toxicology. Seralini is a well-known opponent of GM crops, and his research was funded in part by an alliance comprising anti-GM campaigners and supermarket chains that have invested heavily in organic food.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-linking-gm-corn-cancer-non-event.html#jCp
A controversial study that linked genetically modified corn to cancer in lab rats is a "scientific non-event," six French scientific academies said on Friday. Ads by Google Diagnosed with Cancer - Memorial Sloan-Kettering for better Cancer Treatment Outcomes - www.mskcc.org "This work does not enable any reliable conclusion to be drawn," they said, adding bluntly that the affair helped "spread fear among the public." The joint statement—an extremely rare event in French science—was signed by the national academies of agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, sciences, technology and veterinary studies. It was sparked by research published in September that said rats fed with so-called NK603 corn and/or doses of Roundup herbicide developed tumours. The paper, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini at the University of Caen, unleashed a storm in Europe, where GM crops are a highly sensitive issue. Critics accused Seralini of manipulating the media to boost the impact of his findings, branded his experiments as shoddy or fraught with gaps or bias. Two fast-track official investigations into the study, ordered by the government, are due to be unveiled on Monday. The academies' statement said: "Given the numerous gaps in methods and interpretation, the data presented in this article cannot challenge previous studies which have concluded that NK603 corn is harmless from the health point of view, as are, more generally, genetically modified plants that have been authorised for consumption by animals and humans." In withering terms, it dismissed the study as "a scientific non-event." "Hyping the reputation of a scientist or a team is a serious misdemeanour when it helps to spread fear among the public that is not based on any firm conclusion," the academies said. NK603 is a corn, also called maize, made by US agribusiness giant Monsanto. Genetically modified corn cobs are seen at a corn field Enlarge Genetically modified corn cobs are seen at a corn field, west of Cairo, 2008. A controversial study that linked genetically modified corn to cancer in lab rats is a "scientific non-event," six French scientific academies said. It has been engineered to make it resistant to Monsanto's herbicide Roundup. This enables farmers to douse fields with the weedkiller in a single go, thus offering substantial savings. The study was published on September 19 in a peer-reviewed specialist journal called Food and Chemical Toxicology. Seralini is a well-known opponent of GM crops, and his research was funded in part by an alliance comprising anti-GM campaigners and supermarket chains that have invested heavily in organic food.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-linking-gm-corn-cancer-non-event.html#jCp

26 comments:

Nick Sollogub said...

Where to begin with this monstrosity? Genetically modifying foods, right off the bat I am against it. Why should we change the makeup of our foods in order to produce more. There is a reason that the food has evolved to be the way that it is. We can say that it is healthy or we can say it is unhealthy, but at what point do we quit interfering with nature. We have gotten to the point in America where wheat and corn is so genetically modified that our bodies no longer recognize it as food anymore. If it is not recognized as food, what are we putting in our bodies? What kind of impact does this have on our bodies? By genetically modifying the food source, what are we doing to the plant and the rest of the ecosystem. The second issue I have with this is testing this all on rats. Yes they are rodents, yes they are kind of gross, and yes if I was hungry I would eat one in the wild, but does that mean we should take them and use them to test anything? Hell no it doesn't. People would be up in arms, as if the world was falling apart if they were testing on cute animals. Try running these tests on koala's or puppies or something of the sort, people would try to lynch you. But a rat, sure no problem, kill them all. The study only tested a handful of rats so the results are insufficient. Should we allow the rats to all have cancer before we can say anything? This is ridiculous. I can not believe the crap that our society allows. It's disgusting and I am ashamed to be a part of it. People feel the need to control everything. You can blame religion for this or greed. It doesn't matter. I believe we are a virus or a parasite to the earth. We are doing copious amounts of damage and everyone is suddenly worried, "Oh no, what are we going to do when the earth is no longer inhabitable?" We die, that's what we do. The earth has had way worse things happen to it than what we can do. It always survives. It may not be the same place that it was before but it always finds a way. I would venture to say that when the world is no longer able to deal with the strains we put on it, it will kill us. Honestly that is what we deserve. So go ahead and genetically modify our food. You can even test on rats, hell test on babies if you want. Its all evil, and the earth will have its way with us.

Jeffrey Prizzia said...

This article leads me to wonder what is in all the food that we eat. It is terrible that food is now genetically modified to fit our need s of demand and supply. I honestly would not be surprised if one day cancer developing issues are the effect of all of this food. The food that we eat now is disgusting and you can tell that there is a difference between this food and the food that was produced even 5 years ago. I think that this long with the garbage that Monsanto is doing with their seed is not acceptable. This earth was not formed for us to manipulate things as basic as corn seed. Coming from a family of farmers I just feel that this is outrageous and disgusting. If this experiment does not meet the proper standards for conducting this type of research, then why would they make a huge ordeal about all of this. I think that the USFDA needs to get involved in this; this experiment should be looked into much closer since there is not a sufficient amount of info to provide a firm answer. I also feel that maybe if this experiment was performed by many various countries then we would all have a firmer action on this situation.

Emily Armstrong said...

Genetically modifying foods is simply wrong. It may come across as more convenient and cheaper, however in the long run, paying less for a food and ultimately developing tumors or even cancer just isn't worth it. In the past, food was not modified and these extra problems never used to arise. The main issue that Ii have with GMO's is that the public is not educated about them. Sure some people know what GMO's are and how they effect people, but that's only a small percentage of the population. If people don't know the consequences of this process, then these diseases are going to arise, and people are going to "wish" they knew about it. Instead of waiting for this issues to evolve, food corporations should band GMO's so that this issue is avoided in all.

As much as I agree that these GMO's are terrible, I also do not agree with the way that they are tested. Rats are animals, not humans, so I do not believe that the same outcome would occur on humans as it did on rats. Also, being that they are animals testing on them doesn't seem fair. In Nick Sollogub's post, he said "People would be up in arms, as if the world was falling apart if they were testing on cute animals." This is so true. If these tests were being performed on a dog or monkey, people would have a fit. Given that rats do not provide much purpose for the food chain, they are more of a preferable animal to test on, but it still is not fair.

leeann moreau said...

The head of the FDA was the former president of Monsanto, an American company that owns around 90% of the patents on GMOs. He states "If it looks like corn, smells like, corn, tastes like corn, and feels like corn, then it's the same." This unbearable biased has been going on since GMOs were introduced in the 90s. Monsanto has been putting their own people in charge and the food industry is powerless against them. I'm finding similar issues regarding the scientist spearheading this negative review of the paper/study by Gilles-Eric Seralini, Harry Kuiper. He’s been the leader of the European Food Safety Authority GMO panel since 2003 and has slowly been allowing GMOS (that have been banned since legislation in 1998) back into England. Monsanto will often provide private or anonymous donations to scientists to conduct "studies" that preach the benefits or safety of GMOs. However, despite the fact that they're supposedly safe and harmless, Monsanto lobbies against labeling GMOs.
A common GMO is a tomato spliced with arctic tuna DNA so that they won't freeze. However, individuals with an allergy to fish have eaten these tomatoes and had an allergic reaction. For this reason alone I think that GMOs should be labeled. Monsanto puts in billion upon billions of dollars a year to keep this campaign under raps and make it seem like there is no scientific basis for the information.
I read [url=http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/09/19/161424735/as-scientists-question-new-rat-study-gmo-debate-rages-on]here[/url] that "Critics point out that the type of experimental rats used in this study are particularly prone to tumors. So if you divide up 200 of them into twenty groups, as this study did, you are likely to get very high tumor rates in some of the groups. And the fact that such clusters of tumors didn't show up in the two small control groups could easily be due to random chance." ... Really? If there was a correlation, it's more likely that there was a scientific reason behind it than some sort of happenstance.

I'm disinclined to take any ground in the second claim that Dr Kuiper. He states that Seralini is biased, but if that’s no the pot calling the kettle black, I don’t know what is.
Plus this doesn’t make sense. I mean, c'mon. If pesticides make insects stomachs explode, what is the likelihood that they do nothing to us?

Jaclyn Barbato said...

I believe it is foolish to hold strong to the belief that GENETICALLY MODIFIED foods are SAFE. We should all be conscious of the food we are in taking, and more conscious when this food is not of natural origins (has been genetically modified). Although the study had a small sample size (10 female, 10 male rats if I'm not mistaken), I do not believe the results should be discarded. From looking at the photographs and the research that supports it, I personally believe it is apparent that there are adverse health effects suffered when we (and rats!) take in genetically modified food. Although some may question the study because of the way it is worded and was published, I believe these scientists chose to do this on purpose. Genetically modified foods have been backed by (the U.S) government for years (genetically modified soy beans in particular, as brought to light in numerous documentaries). I believe we must keep in mind how necessary it was to keep the entire experiment in secrecy, before we regard the results as 'sketchy'. The widespread publication of these results would also put the scientists involved in jeopardy, and analysis by other scientists (who are potentially backed by the government) opens the results up to the same (if not more) scrutiny they are currently under. In sum, I believe these scientists were onto something, and regardless of 'loopholes' or anomalies their results should not be discarded from our minds.

Thomas Midolo said...

The experiment that was conducted on the lab rats recently discovered that GMO corn and or Roundup can cause cancer. The study showed that rats fed with this genetically modified corn and sprayed with round up developed cancerous tumors. These genetically modified foods can be dangerous to the health of anyone who ingests them. Also, anyone exposed to the toxic chemicals in roundup have a chance of becoming ill as well. Genetically modified foods have been instituted in order to grow food more rapidly and in larger quantities. However, sacrificing health and safety is not a price humans are willing to pay. Aslo, spraying harmful chemicals on the food can be dangerous to people. Although it helps keep food fresher for longer and keeps bugs away, the health risks are too serious to take the chance. GMOs alter the DNA in foods and this alteration can sometimes be very harmful, as shown in the most recent studies.

Jessica Y. Sanchez said...

I like everyone on here so far am against genetically modified food. The thought of eating food that has been modified to be bigger, produce more, and grow faster scares me. I try to buy organic food as much as possible, but sometimes it just isn’t possible because of your local supermarket or store. Try and guess what country leads the way for the most genetically modified foods? You guessed it America! No coincidence there that we are the most obese country either. So not only can you link modified food with Cancer, I would bet money that you can link it to a whole bunch of other problems. Everyone on this planet needs to accept nature for what it is and stop trying to control it, and be respectful to it and work with nature.

Megan Foballe said...

While the study was eventually discredited and nullified, I can't help but be grateful for it's existence. Our American populace consumes so many processed and corn-based products as part of our diet that it is necessary that there be some sort of health enlightenment. In particular, poverty-stricken communities rely heavily on government-subsidized food products that while they may not be causing cancer because of GMO's, are causing obesity and type 2 Diabetes. Similar to Rachel Carson's Silent Spring which was primarily an emotional appeal and awoke a nation to the harms of pesticide exposure, perhaps this study will jump start thought about the possible dangers in processed food.
As well, even if GMO's are not necessarily a cancer risk they are however a present danger. GMO products have long been touted as the solution to global food scarcities and an all-around “plug” for any problems that arise. One that in particular comes to mind are the cotton-farmer suicides throughout India. Because of the use of GMO cotton, many farmers had a n unsuccessful growing season and were no longer able to provide for their families- resulting in 16,000 suicides throughout the country.
This consequence was a complete shock to GMO distributers, and I fear that many other unforeseeable tragedies will occur should GMO products become even more present in our lives.

Annie Bingaman said...

I was disappointed to discover that this study is so flawed. I feel that more studies regarding the harms of GMO's should be conducted. However, I do not know if testing on rats, or animals in general, is the correct approach to take. These results rarely reflect the effects that occur within humans. The U.S. population is very dependent on corn which is the most common genetically modified food. Nearly every processed food has some sort of corn base and yet processed foods are still consumed in mass quantities. Many Americans are so unaware of this problem that we are currently facing, which is a great problem in itself. GMO's are extremely risky to fool around with as the outcome of consuming genetically modified foods can be detrimental, sometimes causing irreversible disease. However, GMO's are often altered to grow faster, thus producing more food at a quicker rate with help companies to profit. Genetically modified foods are often much cheaper, providing affordable food for lower-income families. For some people who struggle to put food on the table, genetically modified and processed foods are the only option. Food not only fuels us, but it can make or break us. Consuming raw foods rather than processed foods can often help to avoid a various array of diseases. Thus, I feel it is truly a shame that genetically modified foods are more accessible. I think more studies regarding GMO's should be carefully conducted and more public education should focus on the risks of consuming genetically modified foods.

Gisselle Rodriguez said...

An interesting point that the speaker points out in the video is when she compares the GMO corn to drugs. She states if this were a drug it would be discontinued until they found safer results. Why don't they do this with food? It is evident that genetically modified foods are hazardous for human health and the environment as well. As we are reaching the carrying capacity for humans on earth we are looking for artificial ways to keep the population growing. If we feel the need to start relying on artificial food, we have to acknowledge that we are now past our natural carrying capacity.

Another interesting point is how this experiment had to be done in complete secrecy so that there experiment will not be sabotaged. This brings up interesting argument because just the other day on the news, they were saying that they organic food do not have any advantage over GMF, that they were exactly the same. How could they be exactly the same when they are changing the genetic composition in order to kill pest?
The news that I saw was based on a study where they did not mention the name of the university that did it. You could relate this to global climate change and how politicians try to claim that it is wrong in order to continue doing disastrous harm to the environment. For a long time people have tried to say that GMO are harmless but as you can see with this experiment it is totally is.

Olivia Hu said...

"The biotech industry is like the mafia," said the woman in the video. In the documentary entitled, Food Inc., the film makers show examples of how Monsanto, the hegemon of biotech foods, heartlessly sues small farmers for saving their seeds in between crop seasons. The biotech industry is extremely wealthy, and has the means to destroy small farmers in the eyes of the law. In Anna Lappe's book entitled, "Diet for a Hot Planet," she details the myths of industrial agriculture. She names one of the myths the "hunger myth." The hunger myth argues that industrial agriculture is the only way for the modern world to produce food, because with growing populations, organic farming will not suffice. Yet the output yield of organic farming to industrial agriculture is 85:100. This is especially poignant because the United States throws away 50% of the food it produces. If organic farming produces 85% of what industrial agriculture does, then certainly we can feed the world.

Corn with the bt gene, or the Round-Up resistant gene, is created in order for industrial farms to spray a copious amount of pesticides. This leads to fertilizer runoff, and the pesticides end up in oceans and water sources. Already, the ocean is filled with plastics and toxins, and those poisons concentrate up the food chain to ultimately end up in women's breast milk.

It doesn't surprise me that rats fed with genetically modified corn developed tumors. In factory farms, cattle and chickens are fed a mixture of corn, soy, feathers, feces, and ground up chicken parts. Often, chickens are found with tumors. Now that I know about the rats, it seems the corn must have contributed to the discoveries of tumors in chickens. Chickens that are found with tumors are still butchered, and the meat that doesn't have a tumor will still be packaged and sold to you. While you won't get cancer by eating a chicken with cancer, would you really want to eat an animal that did? When purchasing raw chicken from the grocery store, choosing a whole chicken is the most viable way to know that the animal didn't have a serious disease.

Celine Hamel said...

Although this one study was discredited, I believe that if more studies were done over a longer period of time; like the woman stated, we would get credible results. I do believe that GMO'd food is detrimental to human health simply because it is not natural. The problem especially in America is that not enough people care enough to pay attention to what they are consuming. There are many reasons for this. Some people simply cannot afford the more expensive organic foods, and many just have the "out of sight out of mind" attitude. Not only are companies like Monsanto harming us by putting there genetically modified corn products in everything from peanut butter to hamburgers, but they are also putting small, honest farmers that grow healthy organic crops out of business. Mass production of crops is ruining soil by not allowing it to replenish its nutrients in enough time. The soil is then injected with harmful fertilizers which then run off into nearby steams and rivers causing pollution. All of the advances in agriculture are leading to further environmental degradation and our ecological tipping point. Once more tests are conducted on the negative effects of GMO that we consume, hopefully it will become common knowledge that we should only be buying organic products. What worries me most is that the results of these studies will come out too late for many people who will already have developed or died from cancer due to all the procesed foods they have consumed.

Maria Costa said...

Okay people are going to give me a lot of flack for this...but I'm personally not against the use of GMOs. Before you get all on me for this, I mean this not because of the suspicious nature of the studies or because I don't believe genetically modifying foods to become pesticide resistant is a little gross. To be honest, it's because genetic modification has actually enabled us to eat many of the foods that we have today. Corn wouldn't taste the way most Americans like it to taste without the genetic modifications that have taken place. I teach at The New York Botanical Garden in the Bronx, and we grow an heirloom corn that you actually can't eat, or you wouldn't want to, because it tastes nothing like the corn we have today. You wouldn't get apples in the middle of winter without the GMO ones that can handle shipping and packaging conditions. So take a step back before you condemn all genetic modification.

I also believe that genetically modifying some food can probably do us good someday. We could probably make some use out of it, but right now, you're eating food in large quantities that are grown with pesticides (because even organic food uses organic types of pesticides - sorry, guys) and you wouldn't have food in the quantities in which you have it because all of the bugs, rabbits, squirrels, etc would have eaten it.

Okay, I sound cruel. And I do believe that genetic modification should be modified itself....if that makes sense. I'd be interested in seeing how any other study goes, however. Maybe I'll change my mind then. Until that time, I'm going to continue eating my damn corn and being really happy about it.

Laura Sorrentino said...

First, I would have to say that Genetically Modified Organisms clearly are not natural, it says it in the name, "modified organisms". Second, if there supposedly is no clear evidence that GMO's are not safe (which is a load of BS), it does not mean that they are safe. This experiment alone is enough to question if the modifications they are making are safe, therefore they should yield the production of them until they have sufficient evident that they ARE safe. However, I highly doubt that will ever happen, but it just goes to show that they will put out anything for money, even if they do not know the safety of it. Any experiment in the past regarding GMO's have been compromised and finally when scientists succeed in receiving results, they claim that the results are not accurate enough to conclude that GMO's are not safe. Well, where is the proof that they are safe?! There is more evidence regarding the harm of GMO's than safety, so until there is proof of them being safe, GMO's should be prohibited from the market.

ghassan karam said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alfredo Dumalsen said...

The demeanor of these French scientists is very peculiar and definitely makes me question the validity of their results. Clearly they were biased from the start of the experiment and their methods reflected that. In addition, the fact that they performed the experiment in secret and made the few journalists that covered their research sign a written agreement that prohibited them from seeking outside views of their study was extremely unusual. New research findings should be peer reviewed and heavily scrutinized especially when conveying controversial conclusions that can potentially affect a large group of consumers.
As consumers, it is our right to receive the information conducted by researchers studying GMO foods; as a result, more scholarly peer-reviewed projects should be presented. Consequently, the ambiguous results of GMO foods makes me ambivalent to this issue. Any new advancement in food technology should be thoroughly dissected and questioned from both researchers and the public. Based on my personal preference I would choose to avoid these foods as much as possible, but I cannot give a legitimate excuse why, especially based on the information that is currently being generated.

Craig Mayle said...

This posting has made me realize how uninformed I am about GMO's, and I plan on finding a good documentary about them to help this. In the mean time, though, I have to say that just because the study may have been invalid, that does not means that the concerns that prompted it are. The scientific community needs to respond to the void in the knowledge about the long-term effects of GMO's. The fact that we are putting food into our bodies that hasn't undergone sufficient study shows how disconnected we are from our food supply, and in turn, nature. We need to give this issue more thought, and, undoubtedly, more study.

Abby Lee said...

It seems that the criticism of this study is the worst nightmare of the scientists who worked on it. They have attempted to find out the effects of the food we eat on living bodies, and have found some terrifying results. I think even if there are flaws to be found in the study, the results should be made public and taken into consideration either way. The correct response of the government would be to fund a follow up study to further understanding of the effects of GMOs. Instead, the officials completely blow off the results because it is not in their best interest to take action against the GMO mafia, even if it is causing harm to almost all citizens. Further, non of the statements which criticize the study go into detail about why exactly the study was flawed, and which parts of the study would be affected most by these flaws.

The government's disregard for research that is being done to protect the health of citizens is scary and outrageous. I think the comparison between the GMO industry and the pharmaceutical industry is very valid and puts things into perspective. The pharmaceutical industry does get away with a lot, but at least they do need to preform studies about the effects of their products on people's bodies. They also do need to take the product off the market when extremely harmful side effects are found to occur. If the side effects are not harmful enough for the product to be taken off the market, they must be disclosed to the consumer. Not only are side effects of the GMOs not disclosed, they are not even known because there has been little to no research done by the GMO companies about the effects. I also refuse to believe ant study preformed by the GMO companies and the scientists they fund are any less flawed and bias than the one being criticized in this post.

zachary roberts said...

In my honest opinion I do not see many people get cancer directly from genetically modified foods. We are told it is bad so we believe it. Then one study comes out saying that it leads to cancer and we jump at the chance. Although i do believe that there is something wrong with genetically changing the format of our food so that it will grow better, i will wait for more evidence before i start to believe it. I truly believe that changing the foundation of your food is essentially going to lead to something bad. But i haven't seen a legitimate study to prove or disprove this argument. I only have my ideas. Maybe I am wrong but i don't see a ton of people getting cancer directly from GMO's. Once they start directly linking some cancer patients to GMO's then i will be convinced.

Donte Kirby said...

This article makes me want to take any information I hear with a grain of salt and that is a good thing. The issue of genetically modified foods is a tough one. The positives such as increased food production are very real and concrete while the negatives tend to stay in the realm of morals and are abstract. The study gave opponents to genetically modified legs to stand on and then took those legs away and more.On the bright side the article has made me more critical of information I receive.

oakleyses said...

tory burch outlet, michael kors outlet online, nike air max, louis vuitton, michael kors outlet, tiffany and co jewelry, michael kors outlet online, nike free, louis vuitton handbags, nike shoes, louis vuitton outlet online, kate spade outlet online, michael kors outlet online, tiffany jewelry, christian louboutin shoes, kate spade handbags, ray ban outlet, burberry outlet online, longchamp outlet online, michael kors outlet online, burberry outlet online, coach purses, christian louboutin outlet, coach outlet, nike air max, longchamp outlet, longchamp handbags, polo ralph lauren, louboutin shoes, prada outlet, oakley vault, coach outlet store online, ray ban sunglasses, jordan shoes, coach outlet, oakley sunglasses, cheap oakley sunglasses, gucci handbags, michael kors outlet store, polo ralph lauren outlet, louis vuitton outlet, red bottom shoes, chanel handbags, prada handbags, louis vuitton outlet

oakleyses said...

guess pas cher, oakley pas cher, new balance pas cher, nike blazer pas cher, north face, nike roshe run, nike air force, scarpe hogan, nike air max, ralph lauren pas cher, ray ban uk, lacoste pas cher, louis vuitton uk, hollister, louis vuitton, nike free pas cher, timberland, michael kors canada, chaussure louboutin, air max pas cher, true religion, michael kors uk, vans pas cher, louis vuitton pas cher, nike free, sac michael kors, true religion outlet, lululemon, nike air max, ralph lauren, mulberry, air max, sac vanessa bruno, tn pas cher, converse pas cher, longchamp pas cher, true religion outlet, air jordan, hollister, hermes pas cher, north face pas cher, sac louis vuitton, ray ban pas cher, burberry pas cher, longchamp

oakleyses said...

nike trainers, lululemon outlet, instyler ionic styler, uggs outlet, giuseppe zanotti, mont blanc pens, longchamp, nike huarache, abercrombie and fitch, new balance outlet, marc jacobs outlet, ugg, vans outlet, barbour, nfl jerseys, hollister, chi flat iron, bottega veneta, beats headphones, ugg outlet, north face outlet, ghd, p90x workout, soccer shoes, reebok shoes, uggs on sale, north face jackets, jimmy choo shoes, babyliss pro, soccer jerseys, roshe run, wedding dresses, abercrombie and fitch, herve leger, ferragamo shoes, valentino shoes, asics shoes, birkin bag, nike roshe, mac cosmetics, insanity workout, ugg soldes, rolex watches, mcm handbags, celine handbags

oakleyses said...

timberland shoes, hollister clothing, converse shoes, karen millen, moncler, louboutin, juicy couture outlet, air max, ray ban, wedding dress, moncler, parajumpers outlet, canada goose uk, hollister, montre femme, supra shoes, converse, canada goose, toms outlet, canada goose outlet, gucci, canada goose pas cher, coach outlet, nike air max, iphone 6 case, canada goose outlet, canada goose, vans, canada goose outlet, oakley, moncler, moncler, ugg, lancel, ralph lauren, hollister canada, baseball bats, juicy couture outlet, louis vuitton canada, moncler, replica watches, canada goose, moncler outlet, moncler, ugg boots, uggs canada

chenlina said...

chenlina20160527
nike free run
coach factory outlet
louis vuitton outlet stores
michael kors handbags
lebron 13
replica watches
michael kors handbags
coach outlet clearance
true religion
kate spade handbags
nfl jerseys wholesale
ralph lauren outlet
nike trainers uk
toms shoes outlet online
ray ban sunglasses
air force 1
coach outlet
oakley outlet
hollister clothing
cheap oakley sunglasses
oakley sunglasses
coach outlet
louboutin pas cher
louis vuitton purses
gucci outlet
adidas uk
coach outlet
true religion sale
abercrombie and fitch new york
michael kors outlet
ralph lauren uk
louis vuitton handbags
michael kors outlet clearance
cheap jordan shoes
mont blanc pens
replica watches
nike roshe run
air jordans
ray ban outlet
adidas superstar
as

fattoma said...

http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/rodent-control-companies-6.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/rodent-control-companies-5.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/rodent-control-companies-4.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/rodent-control-companies-3.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/rodent-control-companies-2.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/rodent-control-companies.html