Breaking News on Food & Beverage Development - EuropeUS edition | Asian edition

Headlines > Science & Nutrition

Pesticide toxicity vastly understated, claims new Séralini study

 A new study by French scientist Gilles-Eric Séralini says that pesticides are more toxic to humans than recognised levels.
A new study by French scientist Gilles-Eric Séralini says that pesticides are more toxic to humans than recognised levels.

Major pesticides are more toxic to humans than their declared active principles, according to a new study by divisive French scientist Gilles-Eric Séralini.

The study due for publication in BioMed Research International questions how acceptable daily intakes (ADI) for pesticides are measured. It claims that ADIs exclude adjuvants in the pesticides that have the potential to seriously amplify the toxicity of the active principle in commonly used pesticides.

“Adjuvants in pesticides are generally declared as inerts, and for this reason they are not tested in long-term regulatory experiments. It is thus very surprising that they amplify up to 1000 times the toxicity of their active principle in 100% of the cases where they are indicated to be present by the manufacturer,” said the study.

Definition of adjuvants ‘nonsense’

It continued: “The definition of adjuvants as ‘inerts’ is thus nonsense; even if the US Environmental Protection Agency has recently changed the appellation for “other ingredients”, pesticide adjuvants should be considered as the first toxic "active" compounds.”

To reach these conclusions, the researchers tested the toxicity of nine commonly used pesticides, comparing active principles and their formulations on three human cell lines (HepG2, HEK293 and JEG3).

“Despite its relatively benign reputation, Roundup was by far the most toxic among the herbicides and insecticides tested. Most importantly, 8 formulations out of 9 were several hundred times more toxic than their active principle.”

‘Huge economic interests’

The study suggested that the standard to measure ADIs was motivated by financial gain.

“This inconsistency between scientific fact and industrial claim may be attributed to huge economic interests, which have been found to falsify health risk assessments and delay health policy decisions.”

FoodNavigator contacted The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which is responsible for scientific reviews on ADIs. The organization said it was aware of the new paper and would review it in due course.

ECPA shuns findings

The European Crop Protection Association (ECPA) said in a statement that the study did not meet basic 21st century standards for scientific enquiry and was therefore irrelevant for the safety evaluation of pesticide products on human health.

“The testing model used by the authors is inappropriate for drawing any conclusions regarding real life toxicity relevant to humans.  The authors’ direct exposure of in vitro cultured human cell lines to pesticide formulations circumvents the body’s most effective natural protective barrier, the skin, and does not reflect relevant in vivo exposure conditions which take into account the absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of a product within the body. “

It added that the pesticides evaluated in the study were already approved by the EU on the basis of in vivo toxicity studies and said adjuvant co-formulants were already part of the EU regulatory assessment.

Calls to reinstate rat study

French researcher Professor Gilles-Eric Séralini published a study in September 2012 linking Monsanto's GM maize and Roundup products to cancer in rats. The finding was heavily criticised and the Elsevier journal Food and Chemical Toxicology later moved to withdraw the research claiming it was not ‘scientifically sound'. EFSA also said the study failed to meet scientific standards.

This week 41 scientists and experts demand reinstatement of the rat study.  In a separate initiative from December 2013, over 860 scientists worldwide condemned the retraction in an open letter and announced a boycott of Elsevier journals.

Source:
BioMed Research International (In Press)
‘Major pesticides are more toxic to human cells than their declared active principle’
Authors: Mesnage R., Defarge N., Spiroux de Vendômois J, Séralini G.E.

Post a comment

4 comments

Validity of Findings

Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini and his team are renowned scientists from Caen University in France, and have excellent credentials. Please go to www.i-sis.org.uk/‎ (Institute for Science in Society) for the full disclosure of how these scientists are being unfairly and unethically discredited by those with corporate interests. The attack on these scientists is a violation of scientific freedom and comes from those who are either scientifically uninformed or protecting corporate interests.

Report abuse

Posted by Kathleen Lackey
11 February 2014 | 20h51

All science has bias

In regard to Seralini not being a scientist, he is a Prof. of Molecular Biology for more than 2 decades. He does appear to have a particular viewpoint, but don't discredit him on his credentials. His scientific methodology could be flawed, but does this completely discount the potential additional risk-factors of pesticides. Roundup is not a safe product; certainly not in the quantities it is used everyday across the US and the globe. We need to think harder about bioaccumulation and repeated applications when considering true safety within our soil strata and runoff into waterways. Excess product is dumped into drains everyday, much of which ends up in streams or in the ocean.

Report abuse

Posted by Judah Sanders
11 February 2014 | 20h08

specialist

As to demand of reinstatement of his former study, less than 15 out of 61 signed petitioners (as of 31th Jan. http://www.endsciencecensorship.org/en/page/Statement#.UuvF1DuA3IU) regarded as toxicology & biology specialists, more than 75% of them are in the totally irrelevant fields such as communication, environment, math, etc. and took this matter as more political & emotional issue. I am very interested to know their academic standard, and what kind of scientific evidences they have to support Selarini's claim.

Report abuse

Posted by Hiroko Desrochersq
31 January 2014 | 17h08

Read all comments (4) | Post a comment

Key Industry Events

 

Access all events listing

Our events, Events from partners...