NOTE: Jean-Pierre Berlan is an agronomist, an economist, and retired director of research at L'Institut national de la recherche agronomique (INRA), France.
He wrote to us about the controversy over Seralini's study - his comments are reproduced with his permission below.
We think his comments illuminate an issue that's been raised by honest scientists in the wake of the Seralini study. These scientists have taken in good faith the claims by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the German government, and other bodies and individuals, that the design of Seralini's study was flawed and so no conclusions can be drawn from it.
These scientists are working to come up with a study that will be acceptable to all - industry, regulators and consumers - and which will give reliable information about whether GMOs are safe. They are prepared to seek funding for such a study and ensure that it is carried out in a rigorous fashion.
Though we have the greatest respect for these scientists' motives, we would dissuade them from such an undertaking in the current climate, for the following reasons.
No internationally accepted protocols for testing GM foods for safety have ever been set, either by the European Food Safety Authority or by the international body Codex. These bodies have strenuously resisted attempts by scientists and civil society groups to institute such standard protocols.
Read more here:
http://www.gmwatch.org
