In 2012, French Professor Gilles-Eric Séralini published his findings in a journal after discovering that GMO feeding experiments in rats that ran past 90 days, could cause tumors and other serious health issues. The discovery is still being debated today as one of the most contentious issues surrounding Monsanto and GMO foods.
Since the initial publication of Séralini’s findings, studies have been replicated in other peer-reviewed journals but without the coverage that was renowned by the mainstream media for when Séralini retracted the study only after Monsanto and the Biotech industry waged an aggressive PR war.
Since that passing news, Professor Séralini is back in the media after a major court victory in November. The High Court in Paris found a former chairman of France’s Biomolecular Engineering Commission Marc Fallous guilty of forgery and the use of forgery; but no details of the court case have been officially released.
However, according to an article on Séralini’s website, the charges against Fallous came about after it was found he copied the signature of another scientist without consent, to argue the studies done by Séralini were incorrect about the Monsanto products. Fallous is expected to receive sentencing mid next year.
This was the second similar win in November for Séralini, where a defamation lawsuit was won against French magazine Marianne. The case stated that the magazine named Séralini and his research as “scientific fraud.”
The larger Monsanto picture
In the process of the PR war waged against Séralini about his GMO study, a creation of a whole new position on the original Food and Toxicology journal was made for Associate Editor for Biotechnology, and filled by a former Monsanto employee. The apparent intention of convincing the journal to retract the original study.
Since then, Environmental Sciences Europe, another peer reviewed scientific journal has picked up the original study for republishing. With two lawsuits under his belt against those who have sought to ruin Séralini’s reputation; and a recent letter asserting his research may have been correct after all, the Biotech community along with their Monsanto counterparts have all but proven the lengths they’d go to discredit anyone who’s science clashes with theirs.
This Article (Monsanto PR war falls short: Séralini wins lawsuit) is a free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and AnonHQ.com.
So did my oral cancer come from Agent Orange or C-Ration cigarettes? I was exposed to both in Vietnam. All the doctors who have shared in my Oral Cancer and other ailments refuse to say although they must know. UCSF would willingly lie for Monsanto? I am afraid the Medical Field is as crooked and guided by bribery as are politicians whom with they sleep. Help me Anonymous please.
You are/were a smoker and are trying to blame oral cancer on something else? That’s funny.
If you were in war before smoking was proven to cause cancer and the govt sent you free cigarettes, you would smoke them. And Agent Orange is a proven carcinogen. Our govt is definately part of the problem. Plus we don’t know how long he smoked, but he was enticed and addicted by the govt.
In the 70’s, the Long Island Press published an article on the link between Agent Orange and cancer/birth defects,
No fog of war here with the 1000s of toxic elements found on the field of battle…Rather a perfect control group:
LIRR workers using Agent Orange to clear unwanted growth from the track beds of the nation’s largest commuter railroad.
Needless to say. End of the story.
The studies have not been replicated. If they had, that would be news. The fact they have not indicates the study is anomalous and supports the idea it is a poor study.
Being republished in a pay to play journal with a poor reputation is not the same as being replicated.
Who says it has a poor reputation? Proof and links if you don’t mind.
The reality is of course that it is neither a ‘pay to play’ journal and niether does it have a poor reputation, and those who are spreading and disseminating this disinformation are of course GM industry shills.
And the study HAS been replicated and, as such, your other points are invalid.
https://www.march-against-monsanto.com/new-peer-reviewed-papers-bold-statement-seralini-study-on-gmos-tumors-was-right-after-all/
http://fooddemocracynow.org/blog/2016/sep/15
https://www.march-against-monsanto.com/breaking-robert-kennedy-jr-40-california-residents-sue-monsanto-saying-companys-weed-killer-caused-cancer/
The rats showed no dose-response in the study they published meaning something else is probably causing the cancer.