Facts refute findings of French anti-GMO study

Why not stick to the facts, even when discussing genetically modified organisms? The French findings mentioned in an April 26 letter were just what the GMO opponents usually accuse the pro-GMO findings to be – doctored.

In response to the research paper by biologist Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen, the French national academies of agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, sciences, technology and veterinary studies issued a joint statement condemning his supposed findings on NK603 corn.

“Given the numerous gaps in methods and interpretation, the data presented in this article cannot challenge previous studies which have concluded that NK603 corn is harmless from the health point of view, as are, more generally, genetically modified plants that have been authorized for consumption by animals and humans,” the statement read.

Among the previous studies were the ones cited in 2009 by the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority. The EFSA concluded that there were no adverse effects in a 90-day feeding study on rats with NK603 maize grain. Feeding studies on broiler chickens, Angus-continental cross steers, Holstein dairy cows, growing-finishing pigs and rats provided evidence of nutritional equivalence of maize NK603 to conventional maize. The EFSA GMO panel is of the opinion that maize NK603 is as safe as conventional maize.

Maize NK603 and derived products are unlikely to have any adverse effect on human and animal health in the context of the intended uses.

Adrienne Gaedeke