Study linking GM crops and cancer questioned.

[proverbialwisdom]

34. The saga of 'Scientist' vs Scientist with and without the benefit of the internet. Oh, snap.

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=14296:pusztai-hitman-oversaw-efsas-demolition-of-seralini

Pusztai nemesis oversaw EFSA's demolition of Seralini
Wednesday, 10 October 2012 11:50


France's former Environment Minister, Corinne Lepage MEP, is among those who have flagged up serious concerns about the European Food Safety Authority's rejection of Seralini's long-term study on the toxicity of Monsanto's GM maize NK603 and its pesticide Roundup.

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=14293

The concerns centre on the fact that EFSA seems to be applying standards to Seralini's study that it fails to apply to the far less adequate studies underlying its own GM crop approvals, and that EFSA appears to be trying to stifle debate and sweep the Seralini study under the carpet rather than asking for further investigation of the issue.

Why, in the words of Jean-Luc Bennahmias MEP, is EFSA not asking "for a major long-term study to be carried out by a panel of scientists with different viewpoints, scientifically irreproachable, with sample sizes sufficiently large for us to see more clearly, so that we can judge and act on the basis of knowledge?"

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=14295

But there is another serious concern being raised about EFSA's rapid review of Seralini's study, and this is the fact that Andrew Chesson from EFSA's GMO panel was one of only two people appointed by EFSA to oversee that review. Chesson, Lepage notes, was not only on the EFSA panel that originally approved the GM maize NK603 for consumption in 2003, but helped prepare the draft document recommending its approval, so Chesson was being asked to oversee a review of a study that suggested he personally might have made a terrible mistake that has put the health of millions of European consumers at risk.

<...>

But there is yet another disturbing aspect to Chesson's key role in EFSA's review that hasn't been picked up on by the French media. This is the fact that Andrew Chesson has previous(ly played a decisive role) when it come to discrediting high profile research that raises serious questions about GM food safety and regulation.

Chesson played a leading role in discrediting the research of his former colleague Dr Arpad Pusztai. It was Chesson who chaired the audit committee which found fault with Pusztai, and which later rejected Pusztai's detailed response to its audit. He is identified as the person in charge of the audit here:

http://www.rowett.ac.uk/gmo/gmaudit7.htm

By rejecting Dr Pusztai's conclusions, Chesson's audit report not only rubbished the research but effectively justified Pusztai having been forced to retire after expressing concerns about GM.

*****However*****, when an independent panel of scientists from 13 different countries, led by Prof E. Van Driessche of the Laboratory of Protein Chemistry, Vrije University, Brussels, subsequently reviewed Chesson's audit report, they found serious fault with it, even suggesting its selection of data had been made with a view to disproving Dr Pusztai's conclusions.

http://naturalscience.com/ns/cover/cover8.html

And part of Pusztai's research showing harm from GM potatoes, i.e. the same research which Chesson's Audit Committee claimed hadn't provided a basis for Pusztai's expressions of concern about GM, was subsequently successfully peer reviewed (with double the number of normal peer reviewers) and published in The Lancet.

http://www.powerbase.info/index.php/Arpad_Pusztai

So, could anyone have been less suited to overseeing the review of Seralini's study than Andrew Chesson – judge, jury, and a known executioner?