GM Watch
  • Main Menu
    • Home
    • News
      • Newsletter subscription
      • News Reviews
      • News Languages
        • Notícias em Português
        • Nieuws in het Nederlands
        • Nachrichten in Deutsch
      • Archive
    • Resources
      • GM Myth Makers
      • Non-GM successes
      • GM Quotes
      • GM Myths
      • GM Firms
        • Monsanto: a history
        • Monsanto: resources
        • Bayer: a history
        • Bayer: resources
      • GM Booklet
      • GM Book
    • Contact
    • About
    • Donations
News and comment on genetically modified foods and their associated pesticides    
  • News
    • Newsletter subscription
    • News Reviews
    • News Languages
      • Notícias em Português
      • Nieuws in het Nederlands
      • Nachrichten in Deutsch
    • Archive
  • Resources
    • Non-GM Successes
    • GM Myth Makers
    • GM Quotes
    • GM Myths
    • GM Firms
      • Monsanto: a history
      • Monsanto: resources
      • Bayer: a history
      • Bayer: resources
    • GM Booklet
    • GM Book
  • Donations
  • Contact
  • About
SUBSCRIBE TO REVIEWS

INTRODUCTION TO GM

GMO Myths and Facts front page.jpg

GENE EDITING MYTHS, RISKS, & RESOURCES

Gene Editing Myths and Reality

PLEASE SUPPORT GMWATCH

Donations

If you like what we do, please help us do more. You can donate via Paypal or credit/debit card. Some of you have opted to give a regular donation. We greatly appreciate that as it helps place us on a more stable financial basis. Thank you for your support!

Nathanael Johnson misleading the readers of Grist - scientist

  • Print
  • Email
Details
Published: 23 September 2013
Twitter

Molecular biologist and genetic engineer Dr Michael Antoniou has responded to Grist food writer Nathanael Johnson's misleading claims about GM food safety.

For other deconstructions of Johnson's spin-laden articles on GM, see:
http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2013/15027
http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2013/15019
http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2013/15012
http://gmojudycarman.org/how-easy-is-it-for-researchers-to-access-the-materials-for-gm-biosafety-research/
---
---
Comment on Nathanael Johnson's article, "Food for bots: Distinguishing the novel from the knee-jerk in the GMO debate"
Dr Michael Antoniou
Grist, posted 22 Sept 2013
http://grist.org/food/dodging-argument-bot-crossfire-to-revisit-some-gm-research-controversies/
[you have to repeatedly hit "load more comments" to read this and other recent comments on the article]

As a molecular biologist who routinely uses genetic engineering in my work in the field of gene therapy, I am concerned that Nathanael Johnson is misleading the readers of Grist when he suggests that there is a scientific consensus that genetically modified (GM) crops are safe to eat and that they do not pose special risks (http://grist.org/food/dodging-argument-bot-crossfire-to-revisit-some-gm-research-controversies/).

The fact of the matter is that there is no scientific consensus that GM crops are safe for human and animal consumption or for the environment. Many peer-reviewed published studies show that GM crops can have unexpected toxic or allergenic effects on laboratory and farm animals. Some of these studies are summarised in our report:
http://www.earthopensource.org/index.php/3-health-hazards-of-gm-foods/3-1-myth-gm-foods-are-safe-to-eat

Since this report was published, two further studies, one led by Prof GE Seralini and the other by Dr Judy Carman, have also found toxic effects from feeding GM crops to animals.

For Johnson to dismiss these effects as "hypothetical" shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the scientific method. The effects found in these experiments were statistically significant and proven. The source of these documented negative health outcomes is unknown but could be due to the GM (transgene) product, increased exposure to the herbicides (specifically Roundup) used in conjunction with 80% of global GM cropping and novel toxin production from the mutagenic effects of the GM transformation process. Only more extensive follow up studies can pinpoint exactly what is happening, including epidemiological surveys of populations such as those in the USA that are consuming most GMO derived products.

I write this in the hope that it moves towards redressing the imbalance of information given by Johnson's articles.

Sincerely
Dr Michael Antoniou
London, UK

Menu

Home

Subscriptions

News Archive

News Reviews

GM Book

Resources

Non-GM Successes

GM Myth Makers

GM Myths

GM Quotes

GM Booklet

Contacts

Contact Us

About

Facebook

Twitter

Donations

Content 1999 - 2025 GMWatch.
Web Development By SCS Web Design