After scientists internationally widely disclaimed a study on rats claiming ill effects from exposure to genetically modified foods-it appears that one pragmatic group of scientists from the University of Cambridge have found a use for it.
“I am grateful for the authors for publishing this paper, as it provides a fine case study for teaching a statistics class about poor design, analysis and reporting. I shall start using it immediately,” said the Statistical Laboratory at Cambridge University, according to Examiner.com.
Other scientists and reporters continued to condemn the French study, pointing to its reliance on emotional claims rather than sound, scientific evidence. Here are some of their comments from this week:
“There were problems with the sample sizes, issues about the types of rats used and questions about why, if the genetically engineered corn was the culprit, rats that ate a lot of the corn did not get as sick as those that ate more moderate amounts. Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the study, though, is the effort made by the researchers to ensure that the first wave of coverage of their study would include no criticism of it.” - Los Angeles Times
“The study came as quite a surprise to scientists. Reputable regulatory and health agencies in the U.S. and EU that have looked closely at GMOs found them safe, as have the National Academy of Sciences and the British Royal Academy.” - Forbes
“Within 24 hours, the study’s credibility was shredded by scores of scientists. The consensus judgment was swift and damning: The study was riddled with errors-serious, blatantly obvious flaws that should have been caught by peer reviewers.” - Slate
“What we need in the GMO controversy is reasoned argument, not scandalous headlines…The study shows nothing like that. What it does show is the readiness of some GMO opponents to jump on a questionable study to promote their fearmongering agenda.” - Montreal Gazette
Remember Mark Twain’s famous quote about “lies, damned lies and statistics”? Add to that list the widely-disclaimed junk science of the Seralini study.