FCT is not retracting the studies it published by Monsanto using exactly the same strain of rat and the same number of animals.

Incidentally, in terms of the extremity of the collusion with corporate interests in parts of the scientific media, Elsevier - the publisher of FCT (Food and Chemical Toxicology), once published 6 fake journals that didn't disclose their corporate sponsorship:
Scientific press on a tight corporate leash: Example of the GM maize NK603 study
Sciences Citoyennes, 28 November 2013
[English translation by Paul Matthews]

Paris - In September 2012, Gilles-Eric Séralini (GES) and his team published in Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT) - an important international scientific journal - the longest toxicology study (2 years) ever conducted on genetically modified maize (NK603), as well as on the herbicide Roundup which the maize is designed to tolerate [1]. These are two Monsanto products. There immediately ensued a smear campaign of a rare violence against Gilles-Eric Séralini, seeking not only to discredit the scientist but also to attack the man personally [2]. The steamroller-like scientifico-industrial lobby rolled into action with the express purpose of organising the withdrawal of this published article from the review, which it is about to obtain, as evinced by a letter dated November 19, sent by FCT to GES to that effect.

It is crucial to consider the conditions of this withdrawal as it shows the extent of the threat posed to the professional integrity of the scientific press. FCT operates on the basis of peer review. (In other words the acceptance of an article for publication is subject to expert peer review). It is a system deemed to guarantee a high level of quality and independence within the scientific world and beyond.

The article by GES and his team went through this process before publication.

Early in 2013, a particularly disturbing event occurred at FCT with the appointment as deputy editor of a certain Richard E. Goodman. He was hired to take charge specifically of the biotechnology section, even though the editorial office of the journal already has an expert on the safety of GM foods in the person of Jose L. Domingo, a professor of toxicology and environmental health. But Mr. Goodman's career and achievements speak for themselves. While a professor at the University of Nebraska and a specialist on food allergies, he was also employed at Monsanto from 1997 to 2004, having published scientific papers on behalf of this multinational company. He is also very involved in the activities of the ILSI (International Life Science Institute), a glorified lobby group masquerading as an association promoting scientific excellence, funded by the agrochemical and food manufacturing industries engineering or using GMOs [3].

Three days ago the editor-in-chief of FCT contacted GES to ask him to withdraw his article - over a year after its publication! In his letter, he acknowledges the honesty, sincerity and scientific integrity of Professor Séralini but justifies his decision by the inconclusive results of the study, based on the hackneyed arguments regarding the strain of rat alleged to be inadequate (for sensitive cancers) and the insufficient number of rats tested per group. These criticisms and all the other attacks on the study however have already been rebutted in a series of well-argued responses [4] from Professor Séralini and his co-authors - answers that the FCT review has also published - again in compliance with the expert peer review process – and something which had in fact generated a reaction from more than 300 international scientists who have addressed the FCT review to testify their support of this study [5].

The reasons advanced by the editor-in-chief of FCT cannot justify the withdrawal of a publication, especially as the review maintains in its pages previous articles from shorter studies (90 days) produced by Monsanto and which led to the approval of the offending maize (NK603) and other GM crops, especially as these studies were performed on exactly the same strain of rat and exactly the same number of animals [6].

Please note that all these attacks on the Séralini study have emanated either from the expert agencies that are both judge and judged since they contributed - directly or indirectly - to the approval of the offending products (NK603 maize and/or Roundup) or experts - often self-appointed - whose links with industrial seeds or pesticides are eye-wateringly obvious [7]. Moreover, the findings of the agencies were not the result of a series of independent second opinions, but proved to be the result of a concerted action [8].

This case confirms again the power of the GM lobby over time. The industry widens its influence and spreads its wings despite some strategic climb-downs. It rides roughshod over our societies' refusal and in particular is able to exploit the political authorities' unwillingness to deal seriously with conflicts of interest, facilitating the development of a collusion between science and industry in defiance of the public interest. La Fondation Science Citoyenne can but express its alarm at this blatant creeping infiltration of the scientific press and deplores how through moral failure it participates in its own corruption.

Contact : Jacques Testart Christian Vélot, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 00 33 (0)1 43 14 73 65

[1] Séralini, G.E., Clair, E., Mesnage, R. Gress, S., Defarge, N. Malatesta, M. Hennequin, D. Spiroux de Vendômois, J. (2012) Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. Food and Chem. Tox. 50:4221-4231





[6] Hammond, B., Dudek, R., Lemen, J., Nemeth, M., 2004. Results of a 13 week safety assurance study with rats fed grain from glyphosate tolerant corn. Food Chem Toxicol 42, 1003-1014.

Hammond, B., Lemen, J., Dudek, R., Ward, D., Jiang, C., Nemeth, M., Burns, J., 2006a. Results of a 90-day safety assurance study with rats fed grain from corn rootworm-protected corn. Food Chem Toxicol 44, 147-160.

Hammond, B.G., Dudek, R., Lemen, J.K., Nemeth, M.A., 2006b. Results of a 90-day safety assurance study with rats fed grain from corn borer-protected corn. Food Chem Toxicol 44, 1092-1099.