Golden Retriever Dog Forums banner

1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
It's just an illusion ...
Joined
·
3,765 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
What took so long ... ?
And it's not just the lawns sprayed with Monsanto's Roundup, it's all over GMO crops ... GM corn, GM soy, GM canola in pet food.
Glyphosate Classified Carcinogenic by International Cancer Agency, Group Calls on U.S. to End... -- WASHINGTON, March 20, 2015 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --

Meanwhile ... lobbyist says it's safe, so safe you can drink it ... watch his reaction when he's offered a glass
Extrait : Bientôt dans vos assiettes... - Interview de Patrick Moore - CANALPLUS.FR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Main reason why I stay away from pet food with corn, soy, canola. Humans have been consuming derivatives of GM crops since the '90s, GM canola, soy, corn oils/starches,syrups,vitamins are all over our food but animal feed & pet pood is direct consumption of these toxic GMOs. I wouldn't be surprised if the allergies on the rise are a result of GMOs/Roundup. Soy protein was detected in egg yolk & chicken tissues in this study Soy protein present in egg yolks and chicken tissues and the gluten intolerance epidemic has been linked to wheat sprayed with Roundup Glyphosate + Wheat linked to gluten intolerance, celiac disease, and irritable bowel syndrome | GMO Awareness
 

·
It's just an illusion ...
Joined
·
3,765 Posts
Discussion Starter #5

·
Millie's Dad, Chris
Joined
·
1,343 Posts
As for GM corn (used in pet food) the Seralini study was finally republished


I've looked into this study and subsequent republishing. It is widely held across the scientific community that the Seralini study was and still is fatally flawed. And no, this is not just coming from Monsanto backed scientists.

" Unfortunately such studies, and the associated publicity, may lead to more serious public health consequences than those purported to be found in the studies themselves, as illustrated by the vandalism of field trials of Golden Rice in the Philippines, a crop being developed to alleviate the chronic disease and premature death of some of the worlds most desperate and disadvantaged children, suffering chronic vitamin A deficiency."

The reason is not because it's controversial, it's because it's bad Science
 

·
It's just an illusion ...
Joined
·
3,765 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I've looked into this study and subsequent republishing. It is widely held across the scientific community that the Seralini study was and still is fatally flawed. And no, this is not just coming from Monsanto backed scientists.

" Unfortunately such studies, and the associated publicity, may lead to more serious public health consequences than those purported to be found in the studies themselves, as illustrated by the vandalism of field trials of Golden Rice in the Philippines, a crop being developed to alleviate the chronic disease and premature death of some of the worlds most desperate and disadvantaged children, suffering chronic vitamin A deficiency."

The reason is not because it's controversial, it's because it's bad Science

Pls provide links to these sources. How does a "fatally flawed" study under so much scrutiny get republished ? Monsanto conducted same study with same type rats to get his GM corn approved, a 90 day study vs Seralini 2 year study ... Reminds me of the Arpad Pusztai study ... http://eatdrinkbetter.com/2011/10/10/gmo-scientists-under-attack-film-trailer/

As per the minister of agriculture the approval of GMOs was a political decision ... not a scientific one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJiIuQyStr4

About Golden Rice, last I read, the IRRI had not yet determined whether daily consumption does improve the vitamin A status & had not been subjected to basic toxocological testing yet
 

·
Inactive
Joined
·
11,326 Posts
Pls provide links to these sources. How does a "fatally flawed" study under so much scrutiny get republished ?
Plurality of opinion, scientific discourse and pseudoscience: an in depth analysis of the Séralini et al. study claiming that Roundup™ Ready corn or the herbicide Roundup™ cause cancer in rats

Why the postmodern attitude towards science should be denounced

Assessment of GE food safety using ‘-omics’ techniques and long-term animal feeding studies

A comprehensive review of the Seralini affair (including why the paper was retracted by the original journal because of its fatal flaws) This link is particularly helpful in breaking down exactly why the Seralini study is statistically meaningless (only 10 rats per sex/group). It also details the deeply unethical treatment of the study animals.

A letter from Erio Barale-Thomas, Président of the Conseil d’Administration of the SFPT (French Society of Toxicologic Pathology) pointing out the Seralini study's critical failures

And FYI the study was republished in Environmental Sciences Europe with no further peer review. It is not hard to get a bad piece of science published or republished if you shop it around to enough journals. The fact that it was forcibly retracted by the original journal and then republished with no further review is incredibly telling.
 

·
It's just an illusion ...
Joined
·
3,765 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Interesting how a new position was created at the FCT, appointing an ex-Monsanto (Richard E Goodman), right before the retraction of the Seralini paper ...
Monsanto does have a history of "safe" products later banned ... Monsanto’s Dirty Dozen | GMO Awareness

So much for studies
 

·
It's just an illusion ...
Joined
·
3,765 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
You mean so much for studies that contradict what you believe. You're perfectly happy to cite ones that support your beliefs, regardless of their quality. That's not science: that's cognitive bias. Science means going where the evidence leads, regardless of what you already think.
It doesn't matter what I believe, fact is toxic products have been approved based on "quality" studies/science yet later banned ... :confused:

Not interested in feeding GM bt corn with it's built in insecticide going thru every cell of the plant & engineered to be sprayed with Roundup/glyphosate.
 

·
Millie's Dad, Chris
Joined
·
1,343 Posts
Seralini's findings may hold up to be true, but you can't use bad science to prove something. In the years that Seralini's study has been refuted and criticised he and his team would have done better to redo his research with his methodology corrected rather than finding an Open Access Journal to republish the same flawed study.

If his findings are true then proving them with good science shouldn't be a problem.

"Republishing data that was faulty in the first place in study design and analysis does not provide redemption. Furthermore, it is now possible to publish almost anything in Open Access journals!"
 

·
Millie's Dad, Chris
Joined
·
1,343 Posts
fact is toxic products have been approved based on "quality" studies/science yet later banned

That is science unfortunately. Testing methodology gets better, new information is found, science readjusts it's position. Science has to move with what it has at present.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Seralini's findings may hold up to be true, but you can't use bad science to prove something. In the years that Seralini's study has been refuted and criticised he and his team would have done better to redo his research with his methodology corrected rather than finding an Open Access Journal to republish the same flawed study.

If his findings are true then proving them with good science shouldn't be a problem.

"Republishing data that was faulty in the first place in study design and analysis does not provide redemption. Furthermore, it is now possible to publish almost anything in Open Access journals!"
I had read that the study Seralini conducted was same as Monsanto's study which got this GM corn approved, only difference being Monsanto's was a 90 day study vs Seralini's 2 years ? If so, does it invalidate Monsanto safety study as well ? GMO Seralini – Critics answered
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
Monsanto is pure evil any way you cut it
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssacres and T&T

·
Inactive
Joined
·
11,326 Posts
I had read that the study Seralini conducted was same as Monsanto's study which got this GM corn approved, only difference being Monsanto's was a 90 day study vs Seralini's 2 years ? If so, does it invalidate Monsanto safety study as well ? GMO Seralini – Critics answered
Glyphosate is about 40 years old, so there have actually been hundreds of studies on its effects, and the large-scale ones appear to show no relationship to cancer. Your question conflates the issue from the Seralini study that started this thread (is glyphosate carcinogenic?) and a safety study of a particular GMO corn strain. The Seralini site you linked deliberately conflates the two in order to make it sound like Monsanto did one study one time, but that's not the case in reality.

Seralini's bad science really undermines an important issue in our use of pesticides and GMOs. By conducting bad science and an inflammatory PR campaign, that research team is distracting from the real work being done. I don't think we do ourselves a service by running off half-cocked when a mediocre researcher sends out scary pictures of rats with tumors. There are carcinogenic pesticides out there and legitimate concerns about glyphosate, but good science means rejecting bad studies, whether they support the conclusions you like or not.
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top