Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Roundup’s Glyphosate, Found in 100% of California Wines Tested [View all]PatSeg
(46,777 posts)155. New Peer-reviewed Paper's Bold Statement
One of the benchmark moments in the movement for GMO transparency came in 2012 when professor Gilles-Eric Séralini of France and his team published a study showing the toxic, carcinogenic effects of Monsantos Roundup and Roundup-Ready corn on lab rats.
The study was retracted, however, amid a firestorm of controversy and questionable ethics surrounding the Biotech industry and its role in getting the paper taken out of the peer-reviewed journal Food and Chemical Toxicology.
Eventually, Séralini and his study were able to resurface as it was later published in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Sciences Europe, a development that was far less covered in the mainstream media than the retraction of the paper, and the controversy surrounding Monsantos role in that process as well.
Now, yet another peer-reviewed paper is once again backing the Séralini study and asking deeper questions about what has become of science in an era where commercial and corporate interests are taking an active role in deciding what results should be deemed acceptable.
http://www.march-against-monsanto.com/new-peer-reviewed-papers-bold-statement-seralini-study-on-gmos-tumors-was-right-after-all/
Science must be defended against commercial interests that attempt to get important papers on GMOs and pesticides retracted rather than encouraging further research to clarify any uncertainties, says an important new peer-reviewed paper published in Environmental Sciences Europe.
The paper, authored by Drs John Fagan, Terje Traavik and Thomas Bøhn, details the events that followed the publication of the research study led by Prof Gilles-Eric Séralini on GM maize NK603 and Roundup. The Séralini study found toxic effects in rats, notably liver and kidney damage, from NK603 maize and Roundup, both individually and in combination.
The paper was attacked by pro-GMO scientists, who argued that it should be retracted. Eventually the journal editor capitulated and retracted the paper, though it was subsequently republished in Environmental Sciences Europe.
The authors of the new paper comment on this row, lamenting the growth of a trend in which disputes, between interest groups vying for retraction and republication of papers that report controversial results, overshadow the normal scientific process in which peer-reviewed publication stimulates new research, generating new empirical evidence that drives the evolution of scientific understanding.
http://gmwatch.org/news/latest-news/16380-science-must-be-protected-from-commercial-interests
You might want to give this whole "peer-reviewed" meme a break.
The study was retracted, however, amid a firestorm of controversy and questionable ethics surrounding the Biotech industry and its role in getting the paper taken out of the peer-reviewed journal Food and Chemical Toxicology.
Eventually, Séralini and his study were able to resurface as it was later published in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Sciences Europe, a development that was far less covered in the mainstream media than the retraction of the paper, and the controversy surrounding Monsantos role in that process as well.
Now, yet another peer-reviewed paper is once again backing the Séralini study and asking deeper questions about what has become of science in an era where commercial and corporate interests are taking an active role in deciding what results should be deemed acceptable.
http://www.march-against-monsanto.com/new-peer-reviewed-papers-bold-statement-seralini-study-on-gmos-tumors-was-right-after-all/
Science must be defended against commercial interests that attempt to get important papers on GMOs and pesticides retracted rather than encouraging further research to clarify any uncertainties, says an important new peer-reviewed paper published in Environmental Sciences Europe.
The paper, authored by Drs John Fagan, Terje Traavik and Thomas Bøhn, details the events that followed the publication of the research study led by Prof Gilles-Eric Séralini on GM maize NK603 and Roundup. The Séralini study found toxic effects in rats, notably liver and kidney damage, from NK603 maize and Roundup, both individually and in combination.
The paper was attacked by pro-GMO scientists, who argued that it should be retracted. Eventually the journal editor capitulated and retracted the paper, though it was subsequently republished in Environmental Sciences Europe.
The authors of the new paper comment on this row, lamenting the growth of a trend in which disputes, between interest groups vying for retraction and republication of papers that report controversial results, overshadow the normal scientific process in which peer-reviewed publication stimulates new research, generating new empirical evidence that drives the evolution of scientific understanding.
http://gmwatch.org/news/latest-news/16380-science-must-be-protected-from-commercial-interests
You might want to give this whole "peer-reviewed" meme a break.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
256 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I doubt a concern merely voiced is equivalent to the melodrama of a falling sky
LanternWaste
Aug 2016
#8
Actually the Cancer Research Division of the World Health Organization disagrees with you
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#38
BEcaue there are carcinogens in larger quantities in everything you put in your mouth. eom
MohRokTah
Aug 2016
#37
WARNING: Only eat organic when on antibiotics - glyphosate equals antiobiotic resistance
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#66
Some of the chemicals found in grapes by USDA - they test for all these pesticides
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#137
All the tolerances for residues in foods are in parts per million on EPA table
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#110
Ever take care of a person dying from cancer in a home hospice program?
Peregrine Took
Aug 2016
#252
Because of the superweeds Monsanto's toxic herbicide - DICAMBA to the rescue
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#25
Actually, I just got this information about EPA meeting from the great site "Moms Across America"
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#11
Actually, I have rarely checked Mom's Across America but I think I now will
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#43
Give me a link saying Roundup is safe for our bodies, babies and the environment.
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#173
Above link NOT a study but a PANEL- Reuters misleadingly reported stroy
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#199
Actually, Dr. Hobbitsein - your link has been tainted by Monsanto insiders & money
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#201
Wow - here a GREAT VIDEO I found on Mom's Across America RELATING TO OP
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#49
No, but I'm glad I'm not the only one on this site willing to call you out on the bullshit that you
Dr Hobbitstein
Aug 2016
#169
Those poor "unscientific" activist moms are now reporting glyphosate in their breast milk -
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#171
Moms Across America is not a shit site - it's a site of WOMEN ACTIVISTS
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#51
No, it's a site of idiots who claim to have "concerns" about non existant things.
Dr Hobbitstein
Aug 2016
#127
So according to you GLYPHOSATE IN BREAST MILK is a concern about something non existant.
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#178
Actually German studies find glyphosate in breast milk - unlike the Monsanto lab tests
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#215
It's not a fringe anti-science group - it's a mom's activist group fighting GMO's
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#132
am waiting for the ones here who claim to know what they're talking about deal with it.
Gabi Hayes
Aug 2016
#35
It is disturbing - hopefully the EPA will do better in their Oct Roundup evaluation
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#75
Yes, and my grandmother submitted an article in a medical magazine about my grandfather's...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2016
#144
Have any of them claimed to be scientists doing independent research? No, so your point is...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2016
#216
We can't have a meaninful discussion about science because you REFUSE to post links
Dr Hobbitstein
Aug 2016
#187
You don't get it. It's not about destinations, it's about sources. . . nt
Bernardo de La Paz
Aug 2016
#33
Hey, wait! The Gish-galloping "I drink a glass of glyphosphate every day" guys haven't gotten
Squinch
Aug 2016
#30
Uranium??? Damn, I should either be 40 feet tall, or have super powers by now!!!!
JoePhilly
Aug 2016
#80
Sadly, even organic wines are testing for glyphosate but at lower levels
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#88
Honestly, how are we supposed to take such websites as that seriously when they...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2016
#142
Oh, you mean the page that basically says, "if we are called out its SHILLS!" I thought that...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2016
#206
Sorry, I have a tendancy to lump all science deniers together, their positions seem to...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2016
#225
Its difficult to not condescend considering the quality of the sources you use.
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2016
#232
First things first, the effects of lead poisoning are well known, along with what are...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2016
#214
Glyphosate has been widely used for about 2 generations now, if there were adverse effects...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2016
#224
Did you even read the link? It says incidences will stay the same...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2016
#250
Don't lower yourself to their level, while people like Vani Hari are unethical people...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2016
#212
So lets see, Food Babe is a "scientifically-illiterate moron" because she is getting GMO's,
womanofthehills
Aug 2016
#243
Uhm, its literally an anti-vaxxer site that claims that there is a link between Baby Tylenol...
Humanist_Activist
Aug 2016
#205