Glyphosate

(see Round Up link at the top of this page)

This is pure poison. Do not use it.  Do not eat plants that have been treated with it or genetically modified to resist it.

Stephanie Seneff

---

Stephanie Seneff is a Senior Research Scientist at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. She received the B.S. degree in Biophysics in 1968, the M.S. and E.E. degrees in Electrical Engineering in 1980, and the Ph.D degree in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science in 1985, all from MIT. For over three decades, her research interests have always been at the intersection of biology and computation – developing a computational model for the human auditory system, understanding human language so as to develop algorithms and systems for human computer interactions, as well as applying natural language processing (NLP) techniques to gene predictions. She has published over 170 refereed articles on these subjects, and has been invited to give keynote speeches at several international conferences. She has also supervised numerous Master's and PhD theses at MIT. In 2012, Dr. Seneff was elected Fellow of the International Speech and Communication Association (ISCA).

In recent years, Dr. Seneff has focused her research interests back towards biology. She is concentrating mainly on the relationship between nutrition and health. Since 2011, she has written 10 papers (7 as first author) in various medical and health-related journals on topics such as modern day diseases (e.g., Alzheimer, autism, cardiovascular diseases), analysis and search of databases of drug side effects using NLP techniques, and the impact of nutritional deficiencies and environmental toxins on human health.

New! Glyphosate, Roundup, Glyphosate-Tolerance GM Soybeans, Chemical Extracted Soybean Food Oil/Soybean Powder Cause Serious Harm to Health of American/Chinese People. Compiled and translated by I-wan, Chen (cheniwan@cei.gov.cn). (Download)

New! Roundup and GMOs: Are We Gambling with the Future of Food? July 29, 2014, Talk presented at the National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan (Powerpoint Slides) (PDF Version)

New! Is Roundup the Toxic Chemical that's Making Us All Sick? June 5, 2014, Groton School, Campbell Performing Arts Center, Groton MA. (Powerpoint Slides) (PDF Version)

New! Presentation on glyphosate on May 24, at AutismOne in Chicago (Powerpoint Slides) (PDF Version) (Video Presentation)
 

 Compilation (by Rosemary Mason MB ChB FRCA) of data worldwide on effects of glyphosate on human health. Click Here

Former Monsanto employee put in charge of GMO papers at journal Click Here

Richard E. Goodman

New article exposes industry attempts to control scientific publishing

PRESS RELEASE

Independent Science News and Earth Open Source, 20 May 2013

Just months after a study was published showing that two Monsanto products, a genetically modified (GM) maize and Roundup herbicide, damaged the health of rats, the journal that published the study appointed a former Monsanto scientist to decide which papers on GM foods and crops should be published, a new article reveals.[1]

Monsanto and GM foods suffered a storm of bad publicity after a study published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT) in September 2012 reported that a GM corn and Roundup caused organ damage and increased rates of tumors and premature death in rats.[2]

But in early 2013 Richard E. Goodman, a former Monsanto researcher with close ties to the biotech industry, joined the senior editorial staff of FCT. Goodman was given the specially created position of associate editor for biotechnology. 

Claire Robinson, research director at the science policy platform Earth Open Source and a co-author of the new article, said, "Goodman's fast-tracked appointment straight onto FCT’s upper editorial board raises the question of whether Monsanto is now effectively deciding which papers on GM foods and crops should be published and which should not.”

The article explains that Goodman's appointment is just the latest in a long series of episodes in which people with interests in the agricultural biotech industry have attempted to control or prevent the publication of inconvenient research.

In other cases, the pages of scientific journals were given over to extraordinary attacks on scientists whose research revealed problems with GM crops and foods. Often, the critics did not disclose their conflicts of interest with the GM industry, and the journals failed to make them do so.

Dr Jonathan Latham, executive director of the nonprofit Bioscience Resource Project and co-author of the new article, said, "Unfortunately, the public and the scientific community can no longer trust that peer-reviewed journals reflect the true state of scientific knowledge. Some journals have become a vehicle for a narrow interest group – biotechnology corporations – to control scientific discourse."

Robinson and Latham note that the crisis in scientific publishing reflects the wider problem that scientific research is increasingly dependent on industry funding. Latham said, “Conflicts of interest have become the defining problem of modern science and limiting them amongst public sector scientists has become a fundamental necessity.”

The authors challenge scientific journals to level the playing field and apply the same critical standards to studies that conclude that GM foods and crops pose risks as to studies that conclude safety. They should also publish all conflicts of interest among their editorial staff.

If journals fail to reform, scientists who carry out public interest research may need to create an alternative publication model: public peer review, or ‘open source science’.

ENDS

Notes

1. Claire Robinson and Jonathan Latham, The Goodman affair: Monsanto targets the heart of Science. Independent Science News and Earth Open Source. 20 May 2013. http://independentsciencenews.org/science-media/the-goodman-affair-monsanto-targets-the-heart-of-science/ and http://bit.ly/189Ff88
2. GE Séralini et al. (2012). Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. Food and Chemical Toxicology 50(11): 4221-4231.

Scientific journal withdraws Seralini paper on Roundup toxicity Click Here

November 29, 2013 

Yesterday was a sad day for science. The Elsevier Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology (JFCT) editor, Dr A. Wallace Hayes, has bowed to political pressure and retracted a long-term study on the toxic effects of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs).

Chronology of events:

1. November, 2012: The Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology published a paper titled, “Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize.” by Gilles-Eric Séralini et al. This was the first and only long-term (two year) study of its kind ever undertaken. The findings were damning to the biotechnology corporations, showing that GMOs and glyphosate (Roundup) cause tumors, liver and kidney damage in rats.
2. Almost immediately, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued a statement saying the Séralini paper did not meet scientific standards set out by the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development). They accused the authors of using the wrong kind of rats, not enough rats and that the statistical analysis was inadequate. By these standards, all toxicity studies on glyphosate and GMOs should be retracted because they used the same type and approximate number of rats as those in the Séralini study.
3. Within a week, a whole host of scientists from the biotechnology sector, most of them plant biologists, wrote letters to the editor of JFCT demanding retraction of the paper. They all used the same arguments given by EFSA. Could this have been an orchestrated effort?

There have been seven studies published between 2004-2012 in the JFCT in which the same type of rats (Sprague–Dawley) were fed diets supplemented with material from GM plants. All of these papers were published by those companies who developed the GM plant used in the study. One paper was from Monsanto, and the others from DuPont/Pioneer. Furthermore they often did not report the formulations used, the studies were 90 days or less, and many did not adhere to the three dose level requirement. In point of fact, Séralini's study was more rigorous than most. It seems that both the EFSA and the JFCT are cherry picking data and applying double standards. If the Séralini study was less than perfect, then one would think that scientists would rush to design better experiments to further test these results. Instead they viciously attack and try to discredit the scientists and suppress the results. Does anyone smell a rat, Sprague-Dawley or otherwise?

2. March, 2012: Séralini published a response to critics, carefully addressing each concern.
3. March, 2012: The European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility (ENSSER), the Society for Ecological Research, the foundation Manfred-Hermsen-Stiftung for Nature Conservation and Environmental Protection, the Foundation on Future Farming, the non-profit organization Sambucus and Testbiotech filed a legal challenge with the European Court of Justice against the EU Commission's authorization of the import of a genetically engineered Monsanto soybean.
4. May, 2013: JFCT creates a new position, Associate Editor for Biotechnology, and fills it with

Richard E. Goodman, a former Monsanto employee (1997-2004). In addition to working for Monsanto, Goodman is involved with the International Life Sciences Institute which develops industry-friendly risk assessment methods for GM foods and chemical food contaminants and inserts them into government regulations.

5. September, 2013: The British Government joined forces with Monsanto, EFSA and the EU Commission to defend the import of Monsanto’s transgenic soybean in the EU court. Said the Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health, Earl Howe: “The United Kingdom has a strong interest in the science-based system underpinning genetically modified product applications and so has applied to intervene in this case, which concerns the authorisation of genetically modified food and feed. Any intervention will represent the view of the government as a whole...”
6. November, 2013: The JFCT retracts the Séralini paper.

The grounds for retracting a scientific, peer-reviewed paper are as follows:

Clear evidence that the findings are unreliable due to misconduct (eg data fabrication) or honest error;

Plagiarism or redundant publication;

Unethical research.

Hayes stated that the Séralini group was not guilty of any of the above, only that their results were inconclusive and thus not up to the standards of this so very ethical journal. Now that the paper has been retracted, the results will conveniently not be permissible as evidence in court.

It seems that not only do the corporations own our governments, they now own science as well. Not only do they control the news via mainstream media, they now control the publication of scientific data. They are determined and relentless in their efforts to suppress evidence of harm from their products. They continually state that they want science-based discussions, but only if they get to choose the data. They continually tell us that there is no evidence that GMO crops cause harm either to us or to the environment. As if lack of evidence of harm is equivalent to evidence of no harm.

It's a sad day when a scientific journal lowers itself to to being nothing more than a corporate mouthpiece. Comments to A. Wallace Hayes can be made here.

Autism Rates and Glyphosate Application Rates to Corn and Soy in the U.S. as A Function of Time. Click Here

Slides Presented to MIT Faculty at CSAIL Offsite Meeting on May 17, 2013, on autism and glyphosate. (Powerpoint Slides) (PDF Version)

GMOs and Roundup: a Marriage Made in Hell (Powerpoint Slides) (PDF Version)
  

1. Glyphosate: The Elephant in the Room (Powerpoint Slides) (PDF Version)