Difference between revisions of "Erio Barale-Thomas"
(→Double standards?) |
(→Double standards?) |
||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
==Double standards?== | ==Double standards?== | ||
− | In his critique of Seralini's study, Barale-Thomas argues that Seralini used too few animals (ten per sex per group, total of 20 per treatment group) and that his experiment was thus "underpowered"<ref>Barale-Thomas, E. (2012) [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512007867 Letter to the editor], Food and Chemical Toxicology. Available online 16 November 2012, acc 29 Nov 2012</ref> - in other words, too weakly designed to justify conclusions drawn. Yet in the GM industry's own experiments on GM foods conducted to gain regulatory approval, | + | In his critique of Seralini's study, Barale-Thomas argues that Seralini used too few animals (ten per sex per group, total of 20 per treatment group) and that his experiment was thus "underpowered"<ref>Barale-Thomas, E. (2012) [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512007867 Letter to the editor], Food and Chemical Toxicology. Available online 16 November 2012, acc 29 Nov 2012</ref> - in other words, too weakly designed to justify conclusions drawn. |
+ | |||
+ | Yet in the GM industry's own experiments on GM foods conducted to gain regulatory approval, including Monsanto's 90-day study on the same NK603 maize that Seralini tested, only ten animals per sex per group, the same number that Seralini used, are analysed for blood and urine chemistry.<ref>Hammond, B., R. Dudek, et al. (2004). "Results of a 13 week safety assurance study with rats fed grain from glyphosate tolerant corn." Food Chem Toxicol 42(6): 1003-1014.</ref><ref>Hammond, B., J. Lemen, et al. (2006). "Results of a 90-day safety assurance study with rats fed grain from corn rootworm-protected corn." Food Chem Toxicol 44(2): 147-160.</ref> Furthermore, the GM company is free to choose which ten to analyse, allowing selection bias to enter the experiment and invalidating the results. | ||
==Contact== | ==Contact== |
Revision as of 14:30, 29 November 2012
Erio Barale-Thomas is a toxicologist. He is president of the Administrative Council of the Société Française de Pathologie Toxicologique (SFPT, French Society of Toxicological Pathology). Barale-Thomas describes the SFPT as "a non governmental/non profit organization formed by veterinarians, physicians, pharmacists and biologists specialized in veterinary and toxicologic pathology".[1]
It was as spokesperson for this nonprofit organisation that he wrote a letter to the editor of the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, condemning "weaknesses" and "deficiencies" in the paper of Prof G. E. Séralini (2012), published in September 2012 in the same journal.[2]
Séralini's study had found severe organ damage, increased tumours and premature mortality in rats fed the commercialised genetically modified (GM) maize NK603, developed by Monsanto, and its associated herbicide Roundup.[3]
In his letter, Barale-Thomas takes Seralini to task for failure to declare a conflict of interest in his paper, namely the fact that Seralini is president of CRIIGEN, the publicly funded research group based at the University of Caen, France, which contributed funding to the research - a fact that was declared in the paper.
However, in his letter condemning Seralini, Barale-Thomas seems to have been less than open about his own conflicts of interest. He gives his affiliation in the letter only as president of the SFPT. But his LinkedIn page (29 November 2012) tells a different story. It states that since 2003 to the present he has been principal scientist at Janssen Biotech, a biotechnology company and subsidiary of the pharmaceutical company Johnson & Johnson.[4][5]
Confirming this position is a video "customer testimonial" by Barale-Thomas for digital technology, in which he is described as "Erio Barale-Thomas (Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical R&D, Beerse, Belgium)".[6]
Prior to joining Janssen he was a pathologist at the genetically modified crop and chemical company Bayer CropScience (1998-2003).[7]
Contents
Double standards?
In his critique of Seralini's study, Barale-Thomas argues that Seralini used too few animals (ten per sex per group, total of 20 per treatment group) and that his experiment was thus "underpowered"[8] - in other words, too weakly designed to justify conclusions drawn.
Yet in the GM industry's own experiments on GM foods conducted to gain regulatory approval, including Monsanto's 90-day study on the same NK603 maize that Seralini tested, only ten animals per sex per group, the same number that Seralini used, are analysed for blood and urine chemistry.[9][10] Furthermore, the GM company is free to choose which ten to analyse, allowing selection bias to enter the experiment and invalidating the results.
Contact
- Address:
- ...
- ...
- ...
- ...
- Phone:
- ...
- Email:
- ...
- Website:
- ...
Resources
Notes
- ↑ Barale-Thomas, E. (2012) Letter to the editor, Food and Chemical Toxicology. Available online 16 November 2012, acc 29 Nov 2012
- ↑ Barale-Thomas, E. (2012). Letter to the editor. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 16 Nov.
- ↑ Séralini, G. E., E. Clair, et al. (2012). Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. Food and Chemical Toxicology 50(11): 4221-4231.
- ↑ LinkedIn, Erio Barale-Thomas, acc 29 Nov 2012, archived here
- ↑ Janssen Biotech Inc (2012)Home page, acc 29 Nov 2012
- ↑ Customer Testimonial: Erio Barale-Thomas, PhD, Johnson&Johnson, posted Oct 18 2012, acc 29 Nov 2012
- ↑ LinkedIn, Erio Barale-Thomas, acc 29 Nov 2012, archived here
- ↑ Barale-Thomas, E. (2012) Letter to the editor, Food and Chemical Toxicology. Available online 16 November 2012, acc 29 Nov 2012
- ↑ Hammond, B., R. Dudek, et al. (2004). "Results of a 13 week safety assurance study with rats fed grain from glyphosate tolerant corn." Food Chem Toxicol 42(6): 1003-1014.
- ↑ Hammond, B., J. Lemen, et al. (2006). "Results of a 90-day safety assurance study with rats fed grain from corn rootworm-protected corn." Food Chem Toxicol 44(2): 147-160.