Publication of Research | Conflicts in Research Publication

Running head = PUBLICATION OF RESEARCH
0
Publication of
Research
Conflicts in research publication
SystemJP
[Pick the date]

Publication of Research
1
The work presented by (Séralini et al., 2012), was in the collaboration of 8 authors the
research work was issued in the highly reputed journal “Food and Chemical Toxicology” of
“Elsevier” publication house. The primary aim of the work conducted by the researchers was to
evaluate and analyses the impact of genetically modified (GM) food in comparison to the
naturally occurring food on the health of rats. To evaluate the impact of GM food the rats were
segregated in groups one group was fed with Roundup©-resistant GM maize only, GM maize
along with Roundup© or Roundup© over a period for two years and it was reported that the test
subject had a greater proportion of tumors when compared with control subjects. The work was
highly criticized by the scientific community in terms of methods used in the work and ethical
implication of the work and ultimately it was retracted by the publication house in 2014 without
making any consideration with the author. This report will provide a brief overview of the
reaction of the scientific community towards the work along with the process of retraction of
publication.
The modernization of the world demand modification in agriculture to sustain the increasing
demand for healthy food for consistently increasing population, also the continuous utilization of
agricultural land for habitation and industrial purpose is constant stress on the agricultural
industry. One of the alternatives is the application of GM food, however, the application is still a
debatable topic in terms of risk associated with it on human wellbeing. Therefore various
policies have been drafted in the context of against the use of GM food or labeling GM food so
that the consumer should be aware of the risk associated with GM food. The scientific
community is divided into their view in terms of the use of GM food as one group argued s that
GM food is as safe as the normal food, whereas the other group argues for banning GM food. At
present, the European Union (EU) has permitted the various countries which are the members of
the union to self-regulate the production of GM food, but the labeling of food is must, however,
most of the countries in EU does not allow the import of GM food along with the sanction
towards the commercialization of GM food.
To evaluate the toxicity of GM food lab experiments are conducted which have been failed to
provide any substantial evidence concerning the threat accompanying with the consumption of
GM food. Most of the studies that are conducted in the laboratory are over a 90-day study on
rodents, which generally comprise of the high dose of feeding to rodents over a short duration of

Publication of Research
2
time, which makes it difficult to model in the context of longer duration influence of consuming
a moderate amount of GM food. Therefore studies of 2 years are used to model in the context of
longer duration influence of GM food feed on the health condition of rodents. The problem
associated with long terms study such as directed by (Séralini et al., 2012), is the strains used
in the study have been reported to develop health complication and a tumor on their own after
eighteen months, which makes it difficult to interpret the impact of GM food on the health of
rodent or it is just occurring due to the age of rodent. In the work published by (Séralini et al.,
2012), it was stated that rodents fed with GM food presented a greater case of tumor and tissue
destruction in comparison to the control group. The consequences were credited to the impact of
Roundup© and metabolic implication produced in the rodent due to the consumption of GM
maize. The authors also hypothesized that the disruption in endocrine from the effects of
glyphosate could be attributed to the transgene in food. In the conclusion of the study, the author
stated that the NKG603 GM maize and Roundup® are the source of health problems in rodents,
which further established the risk involved in the consumption of GM food over a longer
duration of time.
The work conducted by (Séralini et al., 2012), was highly criticized, and different research
groups and research institutions argued over the methods of the study and the unethical ways
research was conducted (Butler, 2012). The research showed by (Séralini et al., 2012) was
contradicted in terms of the sample size taken and it was disputed that the model size was too
insignificant to produce any conclusive results, with an emphasis made on the longer duration of
study on the test animal, who generally acquire health implication after 18 months (Robert et
al., 2013). The number of sample sizes that was suggested that would be appropriate for the
study was fifty samples in each category of gender (Langridge, 2013). The research was also
criticized in terms of animal choice as the rats had the propensity for developing the diseases
after eighteen months and it was suggested that the study should have used rodents with longer
duration of healthy life for the study (Arjó et al., 2013). The statistical analysis of the study
was reported flawed by the researchers in terms of endpoint study and it was reported that there
was no significant difference between the sample studied (Panchin, 2013). The major point
that was criticized by the authors was the lack of sufficient data provided in the paper in terms
of, the methodology applied for food preparation, the consumption concentration of food and