Watch this exceptional video (in French) of France's leading public affairs TV show "C dans l'Air" debate with Prof. Gilles-Eric Séralini, food writer Périco Légasse, and two pro-GM scientists.
Cloned steak and GM fries
C Dans l'Air, France5.fr, 16 August 2010
http://a533.v55778.c5577.e.vm.akamaistream.net/7/533/5577/42c40fe4/lacinq.download.akamai.com/5577/i
[Transcript of the first 5 minutes by Michael O'Callaghan of GM-free Ireland. The whole programme runs for 1 hour and 7 minutes.]
TV Host Thierry Guerrier:
Good evening everyone. Food progress never ends, "it's in the air".
Tonight's programme is dedicated to the avalanche of information, notably this weekend, stunning information about these possible new foods that could land in our plates.
First of all, cloned meat which was found in a plate in Scotland - we'll come back to that in a few minutes. And the possible return of animal feed made from dead livestock. And another decision from Brussels this summer, the approval of some GM maize seeds.
So - should this Frankenstein menu give us reason to be afraid? That's the question of tonight's edition of "It's in the air", with the title "Cloned steak and GMO fries".
With us on this panel to answer the questions you send us via text message and email until the end of the broadcast, we have first of all a biological researcher, Louis-Marie Houdebine. You are a former biologist with the National Institute of Agronomic Research [INRA], and you are the author of "GMOS, the true and the false" published the Editions du Pommier, and you are also a member of the National Food and Work Safety Agency.
Opposite you we have another biologist, Gilles-Eric Seralini. You are a professor at the Universities of Molecular Biology at Caen; since 1990 you are an expert with two Governmental commissions set up to evaluate the risks of GMOs, specifically before and after their placing on the market; you are the President of the Committee for Independent Research on Genetic Engineering [CRIIGEN], and you are the author of "Genetically Incorrect", published by Flammarion.
Also with us to understand this dossier a health economist, Jean de Kervasdoué. You are a professor at CNAM - the National Conservatory for Arts and Crafts; you are the director of the Pasteur-CNAM School (the Common School of Public Health); and you are a member of the Technology Academy - you were the Director of Hospitals with the Ministry of Health; I point out the title of your best-seller, your book "The preachers of the Apocalypse", best-seller published by Plon.
And finally, a gastronome and gastronomic journalist, Périco Légasse. You are a gastronomic journalist with "Marianne"; you are editor-in-chief, and we will be seeing you again after the holidays on the LCP Parliamentary Network TV programme "Toque and Politics".
So, our title is obviously a caricature - although, as we'll see in our three reports on cloned meat, on GMOs with this weekend's destruction of GM grapevine stocks in Alsace, and also on the issue of animal feed made with dead animals - we'll see that all this is not entirely false.
Nevertheless, cloned steak, GM fries - the GM potato that has been approved by the European Commission - and transgenic wine in Alsace.
Is all of this some kind of joke, or are they trying to prepare a dish of Frankenfood, as I was saying, for the next 20 years? Mr. Séralini?
Prof. Gilles-Eric Séralini:
Listen, first of all there won't be any GM French fries, because the potatoes have only been approved for consumption by pigs after being used for the industrial production of pulp for paper.
All of this obviously raises a common question. This is the question of the re-evaluation of the health question. And we need to answer it very pragmatically, that's to say in a way that we can tell citizens what tests have been done, how long they have been done on all of these new technologies, before we approve them for 450 million Europeans or for the whole world, since in any case these products are intended for the whole world.
Today it is clear, absolutely clear that these tests are insufficient. For example with GMOs, not more than three months tests on laboratory animals. Of course they can say that Americans or American farm animals have been eating them, but there is no traceability there, and three months of tests are insufficient. We'll see that the companies keep the test results confidential, that is to say that one has to go to the courts, as we have done, to obtain the analyses of the blood of animals that have eaten this type of product. And this is today totally abnormal for us and for many researchers. More than 900 research scientists have signed a petition for more transparency. And we find it completely inconceivable that today, in the 21st century, not to test these technologies for more than 3 months - especially since these are crops that contain pesticides, in the case of the majority of GMOs that are placed on the market.
TV Host Thierry Guerrier:
All the same, you have just provided us with a rather astounding series of facts. Not only there are very few tests, at least of a very short duration. Then you tell us that these tests are done by the companies themselves, and the results are not made public. And then you finally told us that even if there are no GM fries, the Amflora potatoes - these GMO potatoes that are henceforth approved - will still indirectly enter our food since they will be fed to pigs which we ourselves will consume. I dare say that's a lot of GMOs, for one man, which one should not consume.
Prof. Gilles-Eric Séralini:
The European Authority for example, approved the Amflora spud with only 10 out of 30 rats that were tested. That is not serious from a scientific point of view! And we are more and more numerous in saying so. I think the economic viability of these kinds of products depends on the gaps in their risk assessment. I'm not talking about their whole risk assessment in theory, but their assessment in practice, that is to say with animals who are destined to eat these GMOs, with traceability.
TV Host Thierry Guerrier:
So let's have the response from the health economist and the biologist. Jean de Kervasdoué, you can see that the general economics of the test seems - if I may say so - to be totally ridiculous, or at best very limited.
Jean de Kervasdoué:
Ehh, no, I think that's true of the response, and also somewhat of the question. Excuse me [laughs].
[The next hour of the programme has not been translated].