The study has been quickly criticized and put into serious question, not only by GMO advocates, but some anti-GMO groups have admitted its shortcomings.
First off, the researchers used a breed of rodent that is prone to tumor development. Secondly, they used small and unequal sample sizes in the experiment and the group also failed to make all the control data available.
Something smells like a…you know what.
Below are responses from three scientists who speak out on the study’s failures:
Dr Wendy Harwood, senior scientist, John Innes Centre:
The full data set has not been made available, but the findings do not contradict previous findings that genetic modification itself is a neutral technology, with no inherent health or environmental risks.”
Prof David Spiegelhalter, Winton Professor of the Public Understanding Of Risk, University of Cambridge
“In my opinion, the methods, stats and reporting of results are all well below the standard I would expect in a rigorous study – to be honest I am surprised it was accepted for publication.”
Prof Tom Sanders, Head of the Nutritional Sciences Research Division, King’s College London
“Most toxicology studies are terminated at normal lifespan i.e. 2 years. Immortality is not an alternative. No food intake data is provided or growth data. This strain of rat is very prone to mammary tumours particularly when food intake is not restricted.”
To read more on this study we have provided the following links: