Comments on the Pusztai reports ( Monsanto feeding of (GMO) MON863 to lab rats )

[Guest guest]

GMW: Comments on the Pusztai reports

" GM WATCH " <info

Tue, 31 May 2005 13:08:02 +0100

 

 

 

 

 

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

------

1.Prof Joe Cummins on the Pusztai reports

2.Dr Brian John's comments

 

You can read the reports for yourself at:

http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~brianj/mon86355.html

or

http://www.gmwatch.org/p1temp.asp?pid=66 & page=1

 

As we said before, all we need now is for Monsanto to release its

actual 1,139-page report on the feeding of MON863 to lab rats, to allow

proper scientific discussion on what we're being asked to eat.

------

1.Prof Joe Cummins on Pusztai reports

 

The manner in which the statistically significant differences between

treated and control was dismissed by the original Monsanto and

Government " scientists " as being irrelevant shows why the subterfuge

of a CBI

(confidential business information) designation was required.

 

Those " scientists " were aware that the impact of toxic feed and food

would be hidden by the failure to label the GM food and feed. It is time

to evaluate all of the current CBI designations for hidden toxicity.

------

2.COMMENTS ON THE " PUSZTAI REPORT "

Dr Brian John

 

Now that the three parts of Dr Arpad Pusztai's Evaluation of the MON863

rat feeding study have found their way onto the web, with the blessing

of Monsanto (we are greatly blessed) it is worth remembering that none

of this is new. Over a year ago (April 2004) this was reported in the

French media:

 

" the French Commission for Genetic Engineering (CGB) worried about many

biological effects: " significant increase in the white globules and the

lymphocytes in the males " of the batch fed with the

MON863; " reduced levels of reticulocytes " (immature red blood cells) in

the females; " significant increase in blood sugar in the females " ;

" higher frequency of anomalies (inflammation, regeneration) " in

kidneys of

the males. After a long debate, the CGB indicated, in " the absence of

satisfactory interpretation of some of the significant differences

observed " , that it was " not able to show the absence of health risks to

animals " .

 

What Dr Pusztai has done, in his work for the German authorities, is to

confirm these concerns and to show that the rat feeding study is also

scientifically defective. Monsanto has clearly sought to play down the

statistically significant findings of its own research team by issuing

censored " summaries " and other statements -- but the fact remains that

in the full 1139-page Research Report (MSL-18175 / Covance Study

6103-293) and in its " Supplemental Analysis of Selected Findings " a

number

of statistically significant differences between MON863-fed and parental

control rat parameter means are revealed.

 

These are some of the key criticisms of the study identified by Dr

Pusztai:

 

** The design of the feeding study and presentation of its results

confusing. It contains a lot of superfluous data but at the same time

many important parameters are missing

 

** The design of the feeding study is not well focussed, with many

flaws and crucial omissions in it and not up to date of what is expected

of such an important study. The experiments are poorly executed in

many instances and the presentation of the results is fragmentary,

repetitive, not well set out and confusing

 

** There is no demonstration of the fact that the maize diet of the

" control group " of rats was genuinely GM-free

 

** It is unacceptable for any experimental scientist to regard

something as important as significant increases in white blood cell and

lymphocyte counts and decreases in kidney weights in male rats, or a

decrease

in reticulocyte counts in females, as representing normal biological

variability.......... The authors must be aware of the fact that

increased lymphocyte counts are strong indicators of infection or even

tumour

development

 

** Overall, this study....... has no scientific value. However, the

study strongly indicates that feeding rats on diets containing

significant amounts of MON 863 GM corn can potentially be detrimental

to the

health of these animals and may cause major lesions in important organs

(kidneys, liver, etc), interfere with the function of their immune system

(lymphocyte, WBC, granulocyte counts) and change their metabolism

(glucose)

 

** The so-called reference groups are only selectively used in the

comparisons when this serves the purpose of the authors

 

** The food conversion ratio dropped catastrophically in the last few

weeks of the experiment. No explanation was given

 

** No part of the gastrointestinal tract or any of the muscles are

weighed to establish whether the GM maize diet did have any effect on

them

despite the fact that there are many papers in the literature that

indicate such effects

 

** There were many significant differences between the blood

constituents of the 33% GM maize diet-fed rats and the REF controls.

However,

the possible significance of these is underplayed by the authors

 

** This imperfectly designed and executed study has revealed a huge

list of significant differences between the various biologically

meaningful parameters of rats fed GM maize diets and the proper controls

 

** The list of significant differences suggest that the authors'

confidence (that the genetic modification of the maize sample has

induced no

significant changes in the nutritional value and the

biological/immunological, etc. properties of this important food/feed

crop) is almost

certainly groundless. It is almost impossible to imagine that major

lesions in important organs (kidneys, liver, etc) or changes in blood

parameters (lymphocytes, granulocytes, glucose, etc) that occurred in GM

maize-fed rats, is incidental and due to simple biological variability

 

** With reference to the kidney weight study: This type of relatively

crude and insensitive study on organ weights should only be regarded as

starting point in GM food risk assessment. We need more detailed

structural, pathohistological, immunological, hormonal and functional

dynamic

studies into organ function

 

Having considered these criticisms in detail, EFSA simply brushed them

aside as 'biologically insignificant. " The French, german and British

regulatory authorities also dismissed them and voted for approval of

MON863 as a food and feed component at the EU meeting of 19 May.

 

All we are asking for is a free and open scientific debate on these

matters, with no restriction of documents and no gagging orders. Such

secrecy is sinister and dangerous, and only serves to further the

impression that Monsanto has something serious to hide and that the EC

is not

interested in safeguarding the health of the people of Europe. The

" CBI " classification for the full 90-day rat feeding study MUST now be

revoked, so that independent scientists can subject it to peer review.

 

Dr Brian John

GM Free Cymru

May 31st 2005

 

 

 

 

 

--------------