Diskussion:Gilles-Éric Séralini

Ich schlage hier zwei Illustrationen vor:

http://www.psiram.com/fr/index.php/Fichier:Anti-OGM_Les_%C3%A9colo-prestidigitateurs.png http://www.psiram.com/fr/index.php/Fichier:S%C3%A9ralini_Lepage_Carrefour_Auchan.png

Whistleblower-Preis http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wissen/forschung-politik/whistleblower-preis-die-falschen-helden-13816381.html http://www.sueddeutsche.de/wissen/gentech-kritiker-aktivist-statt-whistleblower-1.2653306 http://www.scilogs.de/lifescience/von-pfeifen-luft-whistleblowerpreis-gentechnikkritiker/ Da kommt bestimmt noch mehr.

---

In what seems like a scene from the movie Groundhog Day, another rat study has come out of the laboratory of Dr. Giles-Eric Séralini, only in this case it is Roundup and not GMOs that are under fire. When I read the title of the paper, “Multiomics reveal non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in rats following chronic exposure to an ultra-low dose of Roundup herbicide”, I assumed a new study had been performed by the laboratory showing what this specific title appears to conclude i.e. that rats exposted to low levels of Roundup developed non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. However, when I read further I found that this was a study on tissues from a subset of the same lumpy rats that were involved in the famously retracted (and subsequently republished) paper from 2012 - the rats with horrific tumors (not fatty livers) due to GMOs (not glyphosate) that was breathlessly reported on the Doctor Oz show I participated in, and by media throughout the world. [...] There is a saying in science (and perhaps other disciplines): “garbage in – garbage out”. (Aus Wikipedia: Multiomics "means a new biological analyses approach where the data sets are multiple omes such as genome, proteome, transcriptome, epigenome, and microbiome".)

Zitat So let’s plough on – and read the 2017 paper which concludes that the metabolome and proteome analyses of the livers from the “Roundup-drinking” rats versus the controls “showed a substantial overlap with biomarkers of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and its progression to steatohepatosis”. Hooray – now THERE is a testable hypothesis – so what ARE the biomarkers of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease? In other words, what proteins and metabolites might you expect to see upregulated (or downregulated) if in fact animals had non-alcoholic fatty liver disease? I have read the paper several times now and seen no reference to a paper that answers that question. So in the absence of knowledge of fatty liver biomarkers, and given the fact no pathology diagnosed “fatty liver disease”, to conclude that “Multiomics reveal non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in rats following chronic exposure to an ultra-low dose of Roundup herbicide” is – to put it kindly – overstating the results of the research and making conclusions beyond that supported by the data.