Plurality of opinion, scientific discourse and pseudoscience: an in depth analysis of the Séralini et al. study claiming that Roundup™ Ready corn or the herbicide Roundup™ cause cancer in rats

Abstract

A recent paper published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology presents the results of a long-term toxicity study related to a widely-used commercial herbicide (Roundup™) and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified variety of maize, concluding that both the herbicide and the maize varieties are toxic. Here we discuss the many errors and inaccuracies in the published article resulting in highly misleading conclusions, whose publication in the scientific literature and in the wider media has caused damage to the credibility of science and researchers in the field. We and many others have criticized the study, and in particular the manner in which the experiments were planned, implemented, analyzed, interpreted and communicated. The study appeared to sweep aside all known benchmarks of scientific good practice and, more importantly, to ignore the minimal standards of scientific and ethical conduct in particular concerning the humane treatment of experimental animals.

Retraction of a study on genetically modified corn: Expert investigations should speak louder during controversies over safety

“…Although a statement from Elsevier emphasized that there was no evidence of fraud or intentional misrepresentation of the data (2), the small number of rats used in the study meant that its conclusions were not definitive (3,4). The Sprague-Dawley strain of rats used in the study are known to have a high morbidity of tumors, but this factor alone was not sufficient to cause the higher incidence and mortality observed in the treated groups (5)(6)(7)(8). One year later, the study's authors republished the study in a lesser-known journal, Environmental Sciences Europe (9).…”

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

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

Rat feeding studies with genetically modified maize - a comparative evaluation of applied methods and risk assessment standards

“…The Séralini study elicited an immediate public debate showing a wide range of opinions (which also precipitated in scientific journals, e.g. [4][5][6]). As a reaction to this debate, the European Commission decided to provide funding for an own 2-year study on NK603 maize [7].…”