GMOSeralini.org editor Claire Robinson commented: “This study has now successfully passed no less than three rounds of rigorous peer review. The first was for the initial publication of the study in Food and Chemical Toxicology. It passed with only minor revisions, according to the authors.[3] The second review took months. It involved a non-transparent examination of Prof Séralini’s raw data by a secret panel of unnamed persons organized by the editor-in-chief of FCT, A. Wallace Hayes, in response to criticisms of the study by pro-GMO scientists.[4,5]
“In a letter to Prof Séralini, Hayes admitted that the anonymous reviewers found nothing ‘incorrect’ about the results presented. However, Hayes pointed to what he said was the ‘inconclusive’ nature of some aspects of the paper, namely the tumour and mortality observations, to justify his decision to retract the study.[6]
“The rationale given for the retraction was widely criticized by scientists as an act of censorship and a bow to the interests of the GMO industry.[7,8] Some scientists pointed out that numerous published scientific papers contain inconclusive findings, including Monsanto’s own short (90-day) study on the same GM maize, and have not been retracted.[9] The retraction was even condemned by a former member of the editorial board of FCT.[10]
“Now the study has passed a third peer review arranged by the journal that is republishing the study, Environmental Sciences Europe.[11]
Article: WeedsNews4929 (permalink) Categories: :WeedsNews:research alert, :WeedsNews:GMO, :WeedsNews:health, :WeedsNews:herbicides, :WeedsNews:science communication Date: June 26, 2014; 11:21:36 AM EST Author Name: David Low Author ID: admin