Modified Food


January 15, 2016 By Joseph P. Farrell

This article was shared by Ms. M.W., and it is a significant milestone in the ongoing debate about the health-worthiness of GMOS.

Victory in Paris vs Monsanto GMO Cabal First appeared

As the article details, the work of French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini sent shock waves through the pro-GMO advocacy community and its corporate sponsers:

In September 2012 Food and Chemical Toxicology, in those days a respected scientific trade journal, released a study by the team of scientists at France’s Caen University led by Gilles-Eric Seralini. The results of the study sent shockwaves around the world.

Seralini’s group had just completed the world’s first feeding study of the effect on more than 200 rats of a diet of GMO corn over a period of a full two years at a cost of €3 million. The study found alarming instances of cancer tumors, severe organ damage and premature death in rats fed GMO corn treated with Monsanto Roundup with Glyphosate. It was Monsanto NK603 Roundup Ready corn. The patented term Roundup Ready meant the GMO corn was “ready” to resist one of the most toxic weed-killers in the world, Monsanto’s Roundup with a cocktail of highly toxic glyphosate and other trade secret chemicals.

The Seralini study was published after a four-month peer-review process by scientifically qualified colleagues and two years of research in absolute secrecy to avoid industry pressure. Within hours of the public release of the Seralini study, a coordinated global media campaign to discredit the conclusions was launched. No facts were presented, merely typical allegations that the study was “unscientific,” or that the wrong rats were used.

World media coverage forced the corrupt pro-GMO EU Commission to cover its tracks. The official EU food safety advisory body of “independent” experts, EFSA, denounced the Seralini study even before making an independent comparable long-term study to verify or refute it. Unknown to most EU citizens was the fact that the EFSA scientific board members had been exposed by investigative organizations for direct and indirect ties to the same GMO industry it was responsible to monitor, including Monsanto front organizations.

Seralini, as the article details, was stymied at every turn by shills for the corporate "science" of GMOs and its large corporate backers, "I.G. Farbensanto," until finally his research and papers demonstrating clear associative links between the rise of cancers and tumors in rats and the presence of glyphosphate - one of the chief ingredients in Mon(ster)santo's "Roundup" weedkiller - was finally published:

In June, 2014, the Springer online journal, Environmental Sciences Europe, saw fit to republish the retracted Seralini paper. Has the new editor of the Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology had the moral backbone to attempt to undo the severe damage to Seralini’s scientific reputation and to the truth about the deadly consequences of GMO patented seeds and their paired weed-killers by printing a public apology? Perhaps that will have to await a new Paris court verdict. In the meantime Professor Seralini and his group are making further rat studies and uncovering more proof that ALL GMO is toxic to humans and animals. In true science as in life, persistent honesty eventually trumps fraud, defceit and corruption.

Now, however, a French court has vindicated Dr. Seralini and his research team in a libel case lost by yet another bought-and-paid for apologist for GMOs:

There is a very positive news coming out of Paris, a city with more than her share of bad news lately. It’s a major legal victory for the voices of science and reason against the GMO Monsanto-led cabal. Its implications will be felt worldwide. If our world ever gets the will to rid the 21st Century Black Death plague masquerading under the name of Genetic Manipulation of Organisms or GMO, it will owe a huge debt of gratitude to the courageous work of Prof. Gilles-Eric Séralini and his extraordry team of dedicated scientists at CRIIGEN, the Committee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering, in France.

In a world where industry’s corruption of scientists has almost become ordinary, the existence of a non-industry-funded team of scientists dedicated to producing research and independent information on genetic engineering and its impacts in biology, environment, agriculture, food, medicine, and public health, including the short, medium and long-term effects on human health and on the health of the entire living ecosystem, is, so far as I am aware, unique. Few are aware of their tireless and largely thankless work.

For this reason it’s doubly good news that the Paris High Court has just announced a verdict in favor of Seralini in a libel trial. On 6 November 2015, the High Court of Paris indicted Professor Marc Fellous, former chairman of the French Biomolecular Engineering Commission, for “forgery” and “the use of forgery,” in a libel trial he lost to Prof Séralini. The penalty will be decided sometime in 2016.

The French Biomolecular Engineering Commission (CGB in French) was created within the Ministry of Agriculture and is well-known for its advocacy of GMO. The body is responsible for approving as safe a number of GMO plant varieties in France.

Fellous himself is no small fish. A fellow at the renowned Pasteur Institute, he is President of the Association Française des Biotechnologies Végétales, and he is responsible for assessment of risks of GMO at the French Ministry of Agriculture, as well as Professor of Human Genetics at the University of Paris. The case was brought by Seralini in January 2011.

According to a source close to the case, Fellous had used or copied the signature of a scientist without his agreement in order to argue that Séralini and his co-researchers were wrong in their re-assessment of Monsanto studies.

The Séralini re-assessment reported finding signs of toxicity in the raw data from Monsanto’s own rat feeding studies with GMO maize, Monsanto’s MON 863.

This is good news, and news like this is what is helping propel Mon(ster)santo's profits down, to such an extent that job cuts are being cut at the "agribusiness" giant. There's a deeper issue here, however, and it's not just GMOs, but rather, the coming collapse of all such "corporatized science"; it is an epistemological victory against a form of science and "sharp business practice," epitomized by I.G. Farbensanto. As the article indicates, GMOs were foisted on the populations of the west via the careful placement of corporate shills in government positions, by the promotion of bad science, and of course by the now notorious principle of "substantial equivalence," i;e., by the unfounded idea that GMO plants of any sort, were "substantially equivalent" to their natural counterparts, ahd hence, the normal regulatory processes of government could be shortchanged to bring the products to market, which at the same time, the agribusiness giants also pursued their patent rights on their organisms, and relentlessely and ruthlessly pursued and prosecuted farmers whose fields were found to contain the crops, even if the farmers had not planted them, but had had their fields seeded by natural processes. At the heart of this epistemological corruption of science, in other words, lurks the corporate welfare and corruption that are suffusing other, seemingly unrelated, issues in western culture and society. As Mr. Engdahl notes in his article on Seralini's libel case, the GMO advocacy party even resorted to the use of outright forgery to achieve its goals.

Seralini's team raises the issue of whether or not corporate science, and its gatekeeping "journals of science" are indeed science as we've been taught to understand it.

What Mr. Seralini has really done, is to challenge the entire idea that legitimate science can be done in the context of such corruption. And of course, the answer is no. This is thus more than just a victory against GMOs, or even the galloping rotting corruption at the heart of the GMO 'industry." It's an epistemological victory against the idea that "authority" and "experts" can trump truth.

See you on the flip side...