Editer l'article Suivre ce blog Administration + Créer mon blog


  • : OGM : environnement, santé et politique
  • : Actualité et faits scientifiques sur les OGM
  • Contact


Le propriétaire de ce site ne dit pas si les OGM c’est bien ou mal, s’il faut en manger ou pas. Il n'est payé ni par Monsanto, ni par Carrefour, ni par Greenpeace... (lire la suite).    ENGLISH VERSION uk-flag                                                    




Marcel Kuntz est biologiste, directeur de recherche au CNRS et enseignant à l’Université Grenoble-Alpes, ses seules sources de revenus. Ses analyses n'engagent pas ses employeurs.

Dernier ouvrage:

Glyphosate, le bon grain et l'ivraie


Précédent : L'affaire Séralini: l'impasse d'une science militante

Autre ouvragecouv grand public :

OGM, la question politique



Ouvrage précédent: Les OGM, l'environnement et la santé  


Ma page Facebook

Personnalisez votre blog

Aide à la création et à la personnalisation
de votre blog ou site internet :


13 décembre 2011 2 13 /12 /décembre /2011 22:07

                                                                                   drapeau francaisLire la version française en cliquant ici

NEW ! Our review article is published

Assessment of the Health Impact of GM Plant Diets in Long-Term and Multigenerational Animal Feeding Trials: a Literature Review,

by Chelsea Snell, Aude Bernheim,  Jean-Baptiste Bergé,  Marcel Kuntz, Gérard Pascal,  Alain Paris,  Agnes Ricroch,

Food and Chemical Toxicology.     Download here.



Contrary to frequently heard allegations, our article shows that long term animal feeding studies examining food safety of GMOs have actually been performed. 


These studies concern GM lines of maize, potato, soybean, rice and triticale and are of two types:

12 long term toxicological studies, where feeding time exceeds well over (up to 2 years) that of the 90 day studies classically used in toxicological studies applied to GMOs,

12 studies whose duration extended over several generations of animals.



These studies by public research laboratories do not reveal any safety problem linked to long term consumption of GMO-derived food.


They confirm what has always been said by toxicologists, namely that if long term subchronic toxicity tests are considered to be necessary, increasing animal feeding duration beyond 90 days does not provide any additional information.


During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.

                                                                George Orwell


Today there is no scientific space left for fear about a food safety risk inherently linked to the « genetically modified » nature of varieties marketed after the currently performed risk assessment.


GM risk assessment is based on a comparative method with conventional varieties recognized as safe. It involves several levels of examination, from the laboratory to the field. The reglementary assessment (according to international standards), and in particular the toxicological studies, being only the last step of a step-by-step and case-by-case process.


These conclusions are confirmed by different approaches

In a previous scientific article, we surveyed 44 publications on large scale profiling of GMOs. These novel analytical techniques aim to visualize the expression of all genes, all proteins and all small chemical compounds (metabolites) in a given organism.  


-none of these publications concluded to a health hazard linked to marketed GMO food.  

-transgenic plant breeding has less impact on plants than the genetic variation generated in existing varieties by conventional breeding.

-natural environmental changes (between two distant fields, for example) usually have a larger impact on plants than transgenesis.  

Partager cet article