3
Comments:

Filter Questions

Reset Filter

No questions match....

  • Community Manager's picture
    Community Manager
    03.31.2014
    Hi @KTOTELS, @Transparency's comment below is answered in a separate question on GMO Answers: "If critics claim Seralinis well known study is flawed for having used the Sprague Dawley rat, doesnt that make Monsantos two year carcinogenicity studies using the same SD rat, flawed as well? Im confused about what seems to be a double standard?" You can read the full response from Dr. Michael Koch, New Technologies in Toxicity Lead at Monsanto, here: http://gmoanswers.com/ask/if-critics-claim-seralinis-well-known-study-flawed-having-used-sprague-dawley-rat-doesnt-make.
  • ktotels's picture
    ktotels
    03.30.2014
    What no comeback to TRANSPARENCY's comment? Bahahaha! This site is having the opposite affect as intended. Bahahaha!
  • Transparency's picture
    Transparency
    09.15.2013
    Yes, I am well familiar with this article that has been posted a couple of times elsewhere on this site.
    Regarding use of the SD rat:
    “Monsanto and other manufacturers of glyphosate, the main chemical ingredient of Roundup herbicide, used the SD rat in their two-year carcinogenicity and multigenerational reproductive toxicity studies that form the basis of the EU authorization of glyphosate.
    If the SD rat was the wrong rat for Séralini to use, it was also the wrong rat for all these other studies. So market authorizations for the thousands of chemicals and GM foods that were granted on the basis of these studies – including glyphosate – should be revoked” [gmoseralini.org].
    On a side note, according to Labome.com, “The most widely used mouse and rat strains are C57BL/6 mice, BALB/c mice, *Sprague-Dawley* rats, and Wistar rats.”

    I find it notable that critics are more than happy to jump on the bandwagon to attack the “little guy” like Séralini for his choice of rat breed. And yet when a mega-powerful, mega-influential, and mega-rich corporation such as Monsanto uses the same breed for their two-year carcinogenicity and multigenerational reproductive toxicity studies, the critics fall silent.
    Why the double-standard?
  • There were no discussions before the expert answer was published.