The Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN) is calling for a moratorium on genetically modified crop approvals in the wake of a French study that found serious health issues with lab rats that consumed Monsanto’s GM corn.
“Health Canada must re-evaluate the safety of all GM foods based on these results and halt new approvals until we have long-term testing and transparent regulation,” said CBAN co-ordinator Lucy Sharratt.
The study, which was published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, has been widely criticized by the scientific community for flawed methodology and unsubstantiated findings.
Read Also
Land crash warning rejected
A technical analyst believes that Saskatchewan land values could be due for a correction, but land owners and FCC say supply/demand fundamentals drive land prices – not mathematical models
Monsanto Canada spokesperson Trish Jordan shrugged off CBAN’s calls for Health Canada to revamp its approval system for GM foods.
“From CBAN it’s predictably irresponsible and opportunistic but that’s to be expected,” she said.
Jordan said Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency have the scientific background to critically and carefully assess GM crops.
“These are safe products and they have been used safely for the last 16 years with zero impact on human health,” she said.
A spokesperson for Health Canada said it has not had a chance to review the French study that questions the safety of a variety of Roundup Ready corn that received full regulatory approval in Canada in 2001.
“Should our review of this new study demonstrate a risk, Health Canada will take the appropriate actions to protect the health and safety of Canadians,” said Gary Holub.
Gilles-Eric Seralini, a microbiology professor at the University of Caen, conducted the two-year feeding trial on 200 rats.
His study found that rats fed a diet containing Monsanto’s NK603 Roundup Ready corn, and drinking water laced with 0.1 parts per billion of Roundup herbicide developed cancerous tumours faster and died earlier than control rats fed non-GM corn.
Most of the female rats fed the GM corn and Roundup laced water developed two to three times the tumours of the control rats.
“In view of these findings the researchers consider that market authorizations for these products should be immediately reviewed,” said a news release issued by the Committee for Research and Independent Information on Genetic Engineering , a group that supported the research.
It said the typical 90-day feeding trial used by seed technology companies in their submissions to regulatory agencies around the world should be extended to two years.
Sharratt said the study raises questions about all GM crop approvals.
“Health Canada has approved this GM corn and all other GM foods based on corporate tests that were too short to observe the severe health impacts that this study found.”
Scientists around the world have panned Seralini’s methodology and his results.
One of the main criticisms is that he used Sprague-Dawley rats, which have a genetic predisposition for developing tumours.
A statistical oddity in the study is that the rats fed the highest level of GM corn fared better than those that consumed less.
Critics say there were an insufficient number of rats in the experiment, especially in the control groups. There were concerns whether the amount of corn used in the diets was normal for rats and whether the corn contained mycotoxins due to improper storage.
“In my opinion the methods, stats and reporting of results are all well below the standard I would expect in a rigorous study,” David Spiegel-halter, a professor at the University of Cambridge, said in a news release issued by the Science Media Centre.
“To be honest, I am surprised it was accepted for publication.”
Mark Tester, research professor at the Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics at the University of Adelaide, wonders why more than 100 previous feed trial studies by reputable scientists have noticed no ill health effects of consuming GM crops.
“The first thing that leaps to my mind is why has nothing emerged from epidemiological studies in the countries where so much GM has been in the food chain for so long?” he said in the Science Media Centre news release.
“If the effects are as big as purported and if the work really is relevant to humans, why aren’t the North Americans dropping like flies?”
Seralini defended his work, saying it was vetted by the world’s best food toxicology magazine, which took more time reviewing the study than the critics who panned it within 24 hours of publication.
Jordan said publication of the study raises serious questions about the peer review system and the journal that published the material.
Bruce Chassy, professor emeritus of food science at the University of Illinois, said the purpose of the study was to negatively influence public opinion of GM crops.
“This makes a mockery of science. It is a shame that the media and the journal that published the study were so uncritical,” he said in a news re-lease issued by the Council for Biotechnology Information.
Chassy alleged that the study raises “profound questions of possible scientific misconduct.”
