Plenary Lecture

Risk Assessment of GMOs and Associated Pesticides: A Problem For Sustainable Development? The Case of GM Maize MON 863

 
Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini
President of CRIIGEN Scientific Council
University of Caen, Institute of Biology
Esplanade de la Paix, 14032 Caen Cedex
France
E-mail: criigen@unicaen.fr

Abstract: CRIIGEN consists of an administrative and a scientific council of approximately 20 researchers from France, Belgium and other countries, which are in favour of well-controlled GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), and GMO research on efficiency, strategy and goals and for an independent analysis of evaluation. They think that tests required on environmental and health effects of GMOs before commercialization today are insufficient. Partners during the period 1998-2008 have been among others EU during the WTO conflict on moratorium, the Dir. Agriculture of the European Commission, the Ministry of Environment of Quebec, the Ministry of Agriculture in Italy, the food industry such as Carrefour Group, Auchan, European Federation of Food Distribution, the University of Montreal, and Greenpeace.
Are GM more risky than classical hybridization? The American position is that the compositional analysis (substantial equivalence) and minor environmental trials on risks are sufficient - there is no traceability.
The other position is the one of Europe and 100 other countries: we need further analyses and labeling. How can we assess whether GMOs are good or bad if we don’t know in what foods they are and what they do in our fields?
98 % of the edible commercial GMOs are produced in northern, central and southern America. They can develop easily where there is no effective labeling, no traceability and with no long tests on environment. There is a lot less GMOs in countries that have signed the Cartagena protocol (more than 100 countries).
There is low diversity among the GMOs today (only four products). These either tolerate or produce pesticides. The outcome is that some of the GM plants (such as Bt 176) have not been resistant, they did not produce enough insecticides as they should have. Today 63% are herbicide tolerant, and especially Roundup tolerant, 15% produce their own insecticides and 22% produce both. Less than 1 % include all other possible characters.
For instance transgenic soya is herbicide tolerant, there is a possibility of accumulation of Roundup residues because of herbicide tolerance. The residues pollute already rivers. Side effects could be due to the fact that pesticides are developed to be toxic. These residues have been demonstrated to be toxic on human embryonic, umbilical and placental cells at levels present in GMOs (Richard et al., 2005; Benachour et al., 2007a; Benachour & Seralini, 2009). Pesticides are not reduced by GMO plants, since the plant now produces or contains high levels of pesticides. That does not make them less toxic. 99.9 % are plants designed to contain pesticides that they absorb or produce. There is nothing new changing this trend on a large scale for the next coming 5 – 10 years.
CRIIGEN has performed studies on xenobiotics as endocrine disruptors, including fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, and other pesticides (Benachour et al., 2007b).
The mixture of pesticides is dangerous. The thresholds must be given by mixtures and not by one pesticide alone. It is not sufficient because within two years the formulation of the pesticide is not tested. Thus effects on hormonal, nervous or immune system, reproduction and cancer are not well studied. This is due to lobbying from the companies.
For GMOs, the problem is substantial equivalence. The methodologies to study subchronic toxicity on rats (90 days) are not even obligatory. For new or pending GMOs: chronic toxicity tests (more than 90 days) on rats on two other mammals should be performed but are not.
The directive 2001/18 is the best in the world on paper but how are mid and long term effects on environment and health measured? Chronic tests are not even done. One month studies cannot seriously be considered as a long term study. This is a scientific mistake. Animals, such as pigs, that are fed on commercial GMOs are not studied on a long term basis. Companies say that seeds can not be tested like chemicals, this is too expensive.
There are many published effects on mammalian cells from GMOs, for example effects of Roundup GM soy, by Malatesta et al. (2003).
The CRIIGEN study on MON863 showed signs of toxicity in liver, and kidneys (Seralini et al., 2007). During a 3 month study on rats a weight increase was observed in the females and problems in livers and kidneys were noticed. The male rats had even more problems in kidneys. These significant effects were disregarded by the Company and some authorities because there were not similar in males and females, nor linear to the two doses of GMO received. This answer was not serious according to CRIIGEN.
What are the risks we are talking about?
There are risks due to the pesticides contained by GMOs.
There are also the unintended effects possibly due to metabolic disruption due the technology (insertional mutagenesis).
There is also for GMOs expected environmental pollution due to pesticides, such as Roundup or artificial Bt toxins.
The risk of irreversibility due to self-multiplying genetic and living pollution may alter the efforts of sustainable development and environment, because the actually commercialized GM plants help the industrial agriculture consuming pesticides such as Roundup; and the patents on life enhance these problems.
All these problems are detailed in Pr Seralini’s presentation and books.


Brief Biography of the Speaker:
- Born in 1960 in Algeria, french.
- From 1991, full professor of molecular biology at the University of Caen (chair).
- Researcher and teacher, team leader and writer (8 books and more than 150 scientific papers or publications in international meetings).
- Area of research: effects of environment on health, in particular effects of GMOs and pesticides on health, sexual steroids, reproduction and cancer, xenobiotics, gene expression.
- Area of interest and expertise for governments (key words): pesticides, GMOs, aromatase, environment, reproduction, cancer, mammals, nutrition, molecular biology, toxicology.
- One of the first scientists asking for a European moratorium; and awaiting for more research before GMO commercial release (1996-1997)
- Member (1998-2007) of two governmental commissions in France on GMO evaluation (CGB and Comite de Biovigilance).
- Expert for the European Union on environment ethics, chemical and biotechnological risks and for the conflict on GMO moratorium between United States and EU at the WTO level.
Prof. Gilles-Eric SERALINI is a molecular biologist at the University of Caen, team leader and author of books on environment and GMOs. He is expert for the french government and the European commission on GMOs, president of the scientific council for independant research on genetic engineering (CRII-GEN).