1.Double standards from EU food watchdog
2.French study raises questions on lack of long-term testing under EU rules
3.GM lobby pressures journal, pushes for study's retraction

EXTRACT: "The reaction from EFSA shows their double standards. If they had been as thorough with Monsanto's applications as they were with this new research then no GMO would have been approved in the EU." (item 1)–-
–-
1.Double standards from EU food watchdog
Friends of the Earth Europe, October 5 2012
http://www.foeeurope.org/EFSA-sidelines-GM-maize-food-safety-fears-051012

Brussels – Friends of the Earth Europe has today criticised the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) for failing to take seriously enough concerns about the safety of genetically modified (GM) crops and the herbicides used on them.

Peer-reviewed research published last month in the internationally respected journal Food and Chemical Toxicology found significantly increased rates of cancer and death in rats fed both Monsanto's GM maize and its herbicide Roundup. [1]

Reacting two weeks after the study's publication, EFSA yesterday cast doubt on the quality and design of the paper. [2]

Mute Schimpf, food campaigner for Friends of the Earth Europe said: "We are not convinced that EFSA is putting public safety before the interests of agribusiness. For the past decade, EFSA has consistently sided with the biotech industry and disregarded health or environment concerns about genetically modified crops. Instead of picking holes in independent, peer-reviewed research, it should be taking public concerns seriously and making long-term safety tests for genetically modified foods compulsory in the EU.

"The reaction from EFSA shows their double standards. If they had been as thorough with Monsanto's applications as they were with this new research then no GMO would have been approved in the EU."

Friends of the Earth Europe is calling for:

*National governments and EU safety authorities to suspend immediately from the market all GM products with a resistance to the herbicide Roundup (glyphosate).

*The European Commission to suspend all new GMO approvals and to start a root-and-branch reform of how the risks of GM foods are assessed.

*The EU to review the safety of the herbicide Roundup (glyphosate), including the link between GM crops and the use of this herbicide.

As well as posing unnecessary risks to human health, Friends of the Earth Europe believes GMOs destroy biodiversity, lead to increased costs for conventional farmers, increase corporate control of the food chain, and fail to combat global hunger.

***

[1] Food and Chemical Toxicology, Gilles-Eric Séralini (2012) Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant
genetically modified maize
http://research.sustainablefoodtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Final-Paper.pdf

[2] 4 October 2012, EFSA publishes initial review on GM maize and herbicide study,http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/press/news/121004.htm
–-
–-
2.European food agency issues preliminary review of GM maize rat study
Greenpeace, October 4 2012
http://www.greenpeace.org/eu-unit/en/News/2012/EFSA-rat-study/

*French study raises questions on lack of long-term testing under EU rules

Brussels – The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) today delivered a preliminary review of a new two-year French study which aimed to research potential long-term health impacts of a genetically modified (GM) maize, Monsanto’s NK603, and the herbicide it is engineered to tolerate, Roundup. 
Since its publication, the debate surrounding the French study has brought into sharp focus the fact that no suitable, universally agreed protocols to conduct such long term tests so far exist. This raises fundamental questions on why the current EU safety regime does not include testing of the long-term effects of GM crops, said Greenpeace.

All GM crops currently consumed by humans and animals in the EU have been approved on the basis of testing by the biotech industry lasting between 28 and 90 days. This is not sufficient to identify problems which might emerge during the lifetimes of humans and animals consuming these crops or across generations.

Greenpeace EU agriculture policy director Marco Contiero said: "There is an unacceptable gap in current EU safety testing which largely ignores potential long-term health and environmental impacts of GM crops. This is yet another reason to immediately freeze approvals of new GM crops. The EU needs to redesign safety testing so that it routinely assesses impacts over the long term."

"EFSA recognises that appropriate methodology is crucial for serious scientific research, but omits to mention the fact that no agreed methods currently exist to carry out comprehensive testing of long-term exposure to GM food. This is why suitable methodologies must be developed and the French study should be replicated according to these agreed methods," Contiero added.

Notes to editors:
[1] For more information on the potential health risks of GM crops, see the concise Greenpeace briefing on the environmental and health impacts of GM crops.

Contacts:
Marco Contiero – Greenpeace agriculture policy director: +32 (0)477 777034, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Janet Cotter – Senior Greenpeace scientist: +44 (0)781 2174783, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Greenpeace EU press desk: +32 (0)2 274 1911, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

This press release is also available on www.greenepeace.eu
For breaking news and comment on EU affairs: www.twitter.com/GreenpeaceEU

Greenpeace is an independent global campaigning organisation that acts to change attitudes and behaviour, to protect and conserve the environment and to promote peace. Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments, the EU, businesses or political parties.
–-
–-
3.GM lobby pressures journal, pushes for study's retraction

The GM lobby are rapidly following up the European Food Safety Authority's rushed dismissal of the Seralini study with demands for the authors to retract the paper and with attempts to pressurise the journal that published the study, and even to make sure that the peer review process is adjusted to prevent future publication of such studies.
http://www.senseaboutscience.org/news.php/273/letter-from-scientists-to-journal-that-published-seralini-rat-feeding-study
http://www.efb-central.org/images//uploads/EFBStatement.pdf