The French national academies of sciences, technology, medicine, pharmacy, veterinary studies and agriculture have dismissed the controversial study of genetically modified corn conducted by their countryman Gilles-Eric Seralini as meaningless, and chastised him for spreading fear among the public. They also expressed disappointment in the peer-review process that allowed the study to be published in a mainstream scientific journal.

In a joint statement - something described by the French news service AFP as an “extremely rare event in French science” - the academies described the study as a “scientific non-event” that “does not enable any reliable conclusion to be drawn” from its findings. Seralini and his colleagues at the University of Caen claimed that a diet of the genetically modified corn known as NK603 caused laboratory rats to develop tumors.

“Given the numerous gaps in methods and interpretation, the data presented in this article cannot challenge previous studies which have concluded that NK603 corn is harmless from the health point of view, as are, more generally, genetically modified plants that have been authorized for consumption by animals and humans,” said the statement from the French academies, which are learned societies that advise the government, equivalent to the National Academies in the United States.“Hyping the reputation of a scientist or a team is a serious misdemeanor when it helps to spread fear among the public that is not based on any firm conclusion,” the academies said. “Conventional statistical analysis…showed no significant difference between the (rat) groups…in contrary to the wording used by the authors of the article for the public.”

The academies also slammed the peer review process which allowed the Seralini paper to be published in the Food and Chemical Toxicology Journal.

“Certain articles published in the international journals, including some of the most reputable, are sometimes of mediocre quality or are later revealed to be inaccurate,” they said.

Publication of Seralini’s assertions has triggered an avalanche of scientific criticism, with the paper being demolished by the European Food Safety Authority, the German risk assessment agency, and other scientific authorities in Europe. Read more.