{"id":10326,"date":"2013-10-25T17:58:19","date_gmt":"2013-10-26T00:58:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.bradblog.com\/?p=10326"},"modified":"2013-10-25T17:58:19","modified_gmt":"2013-10-26T00:58:19","slug":"european-scientists-say-debate-over-gmo-safety-far-from-over","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bradblog.com\/?p=10326","title":{"rendered":"European Scientists Say Debate Over GMO Safety Far From Over"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/BradBlog.com\/Images\/GMO_Corn_syringe.jpg\" hspace=\"6\" vspace=\"3\" border=\"0\" align=\"right\">A headline in the bi-monthly magazine, <i>Pacific Standard<\/i> declares: &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.psmag.com\/health\/scientific-debate-gm-foods-theyre-safe-66711\/\">The Scientific Debate About GM Foods Is Over: They&#8217;re Safe<\/a>&#8220;. The article cites multiple scientific journals and governmental organizations to support the assertion.<\/p>\n<p>Anyone reading the article might assume that, like global climate change, there is a consensus within the scientific community that food made of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are perfectly safe for human consumption; that there&#8217;s no need for a debate; that the <a href=\"http:\/\/yeson522.com\/\">now-pending initiative<\/a> to require GM foods to be labeled as such in Washington State is just silly.<\/p>\n<p>After articles like the one offered by <i>Pacific Standard<\/i> &#8212; and a <a href=\"http:\/\/www.treehugger.com\/environmental-policy\/food-corporations-donate-172-million-flight-gmo-labeling-washington-state.html\">$17.2 million ad campaign<\/a> by Monsanto and the Grocer&#8217;s Manufacturing Association &#8212; enough Evergreen State voters are seemingly now convinced that there is no need to label GMOs that pollsters have declared the initiative <a href=\"http:\/\/www.foodsafetynews.com\/2013\/10\/momentum-may-have-turned-against-gmo-labeling-in-washington-state\/#.UmlFMIV-CHk\">&#8220;too close to call&#8221;<\/a> at the moment. Why, after all, should we bother to label food in the face of a scientific consensus that GMOs are perfectly safe?<\/p>\n<p>The problem is, according to the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ensser.org\/\">European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Studies (ENSSER)<\/a>, no such scientific consensus exists&#8230;<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p>In an <a href=\"https:\/\/bradblog.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/ENSSER_Statement_no_scientific_consensus_on_GMO_safety_ENG_LV.pdf\">Oct. 21 Statement [PDF]<\/a> signed by 90 scientists, academics and physicians, ENSSER insists the debate over GMO safety is far from over.<\/p>\n<p>The ENNSER statement not only affirmatively denies the existence of a &#8220;scientific consensus on GMO safety,&#8221; but claims that &#8220;most studies concluding that GM foods were as safe and nutritious as those obtained by conventional breeding were &#8216;performed by biotechnology companies or associates, which are responsible [for] commercializing these GM plants.'&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>ENSSER challenges the methodology of such studies, noting that studies which involve &#8220;one group of animals&#8221;\u00a6fed GM food and another&#8221;\u00a6an equivalent non-GM diet&#8221; are &#8220;rare.&#8221;  The rare studies that <em>did<\/em> apply such rigorous scientific methodology &#8220;have revealed toxic effects or signs of toxicity in GM-fed animals.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The concerns raised by these studies,&#8221; the ENSSER scientists say, &#8220;have not been followed up by targeted research that could confirm or refute the initial findings.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>The group further decries the absence of &#8220;epidemiological studies investigating potential effects of GM food consumption on human health.&#8221;  The report asserts: &#8220;Claims that scientific and governmental bodies endorse GMO safety are exaggerated and inaccurate.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>For example, a 2010 report by the European Union research project entitled &#8220;A decade of EU-funded GMO research (2001-2010)&#8221; has been &#8220;cited internationally as providing evidence for GM crop and food safety.&#8221;  In reality, the cited EU report was the product of a research project that &#8220;was not designed to test the safety of any single GM food, but [instead was designed] to focus on &#8216;the development of safety assessment approaches.'&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>There were only five (5) &#8220;animal feeding studies&#8221; referenced in the EU report, none of which &#8220;tested [commercialized] GM food; none tested the GM food for long-term effects beyond the sub-chronic period of 90 days; all found differences in the GM-fed animals, which in some cases were statistically significant; and none concluded on the safety of the GM food tested, let alone on the safety of GM foods in general.&#8221; <\/p>\n<p>Something to chew on as the debate over GMO labeling rages on&#8230;<\/p>\n<p><center><strong>* * *<\/strong><\/center><em>Ernest A. Canning has been an active member of the California state bar since 1977.  Mr. Canning has received both undergraduate and graduate degrees in political science as well as a juris doctor.  He is also a Vietnam vet (4th Infantry, Central Highlands 1968). <strong>Follow him on Twitter: <a href=\"http:\/\/twitter.com\/cann4ing\"><strong>@Cann4ing<\/strong><\/a><\/strong>.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A headline in the bi-monthly magazine, Pacific Standard declares: &#8220;The Scientific Debate About GM Foods Is Over: They&#8217;re Safe&#8220;. The article cites multiple scientific journals and governmental organizations to support the assertion. Anyone reading the article might assume that, like global climate change, there is a consensus within the scientific community that food made of [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":107,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[192,390,200,669,670,671,257],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-10326","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-accountability","category-economy","category-environment","category-food-safety","category-gmos","category-monsanto","category-washington-state"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bradblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10326","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bradblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bradblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bradblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/107"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bradblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=10326"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/bradblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10326\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bradblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=10326"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bradblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=10326"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bradblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=10326"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bradblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcoauthors&post=10326"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}