椰爸按语：原来孟山都以及全世界的转基因公司和砖家做的证明转基因“安全”动物试验的打分线“起点”都是“五十米”的！即给对照组的动物吃的“无转基因、无农药”的“干净”食物都是经过严重转基因和农药污染的的毒饲料！这就如同赛跑比赛打分线不在零米位置上，而是在“五十米”的位置上一样！那么你跑了六十米的距离裁判给你打分只有十米！你跑了一百米裁判给你打分才只有50米！
这样的话，吃转基因饲料的小白鼠即使有60%生了肿瘤也只能算是只有10%的小白鼠生了肿瘤！因为“对照组”的小白鼠吃污染过的不干净饲料也生了50%的肿瘤！打分起点就是要先扣除这“对照组”的50%生肿瘤的数量！这样即使是有80%的小白鼠吃转基因饲料生肿瘤也只能算是只有30%的小白鼠生肿瘤！还没超出转基因“安全线”诶！由此就可以证明转基因很“安全”诶！原来转基因的“安全性”的“科学依据”就是这样来的！原来胡瑞法的9333就是这样来的！
云南财经大学特聘教授顾秀林 发文时间：2015-06-20 12:54
法国卡昂大学的塞拉利尼团队完成了一项新研究：动物实验中给对照组动物吃的“干净”饲料，是否足够干净（即无害）。他的实验用了13个样品，来自5个国家（我送去一种不知用上了了没），都是所谓“营养平衡”、“符合卫生标准”的实验室用品（老鼠饲料叫做rat chow）。
Contaminated lab feed invalidates commercialization of chemicals and GMOs – New study
最新研究：实验用的饲料被污染了 —— 化学药物和转基因商业化应用的合理性被颠覆
最新研究结果：所有13个样品无一例外测出了污染物，共计有262种农药，4种重金属，17种毒性物和furans，18种PCBs，还有 —— 22种转基因成分！
污染的“剂量水平”：达到了“致病”水平。
被当作“干净无害”的对照组饲料，用在最严格、最昂贵的科学实验里。
对照组，是动物实验中，衡量“实验组”所用的那把科学的尺子。
尺子不准，怎么能量长短?
在实验中，对照组动物的患病率，高得出乎预料，例如塞拉利尼2012年的实验结果(曾经给了反方一个攻击的“重点”)，以及很多同类实验结果。
原来，那不是什么“属于个体差异”的自然现象;“统计上不显著”也不是因为什么生物学原因，而是——对照组用的饲料，被化学物与转基因成分严重污染了。
对照组，实验组 —— 原来两个都成了实验组。
你是量我的尺子，我是量你的尺子——这，还不乱了套?
塞拉利尼团队的最新发现的意义是：此前所有的动物喂养实验，可能都不能成立。
根据那些实验得出结论--化学农药和转基因安全——全部难以成立。
已经发表的关于转基因安全性的动物实验，在整体上为【有偏】。其结论不成立。 北理工的胡瑞法教授，再三地告诉我们，全球科学家辛辛苦苦写了并发表了9333篇报告，他辛辛苦苦地全都看了!9333中绝大多数的研究结论是：“转基因无害”!
所以，科学家说了，转基因无害!
所以，中国人拒绝转基因食品，不科学，不行!
还是科学有力量。一篇报告对抗9333: 你连尺子都搞错了，你衡量个啥?
简单解释：在实验中发现，喂转基因饲料的动物，相比吃干净饲料的动物，生病的比率差不多，没有所谓的“统计显著性”;既然动物也有生老病死，既然吃干净饲料的老鼠和吃转基因的老鼠生病的比例差别不太大，所以9333，得不出“转基因不安全”的科学结论。这个说法符合科学的“规范”吗?基本上符合，只是除了前提之外。
胡瑞法没有超越“科学”的那个筐子。
告诉胡瑞法：前提错了，你那个筐子没用了。
胡瑞法会继续坐在那筐子里 —— 坐好，别出来。
法国卡昂大学塞拉利尼团队，2012年的老鼠研究是秘密进行的，曾经得到CRIIGEN的长期支持;这一次，再一次得到CRIIGEN的支持——世界上“科学家共同体”在分化。
为了追求真相，为了对得起良心和世人、后人，也为了半夜不作噩梦，总会有人把“科学”当作“志业”而不仅仅是“职业”，并且为之献身，不计代价。
在中国，还没有看到转基因科学圈子分化的迹象。
期待。
原文 。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。
Contaminated lab feed invalidates commercialization of chemicals and GMOs – New study
Laboratory rats are frequently used for testing chemicals and genetically modified (GMO) foods, as the last step before commercialization in order to determine effects on mammalian health and predict risk in humans.
Such chemicals include pesticides (which often are endocrine disruptors or toxic to the nervous system), plasticizers, and food additives. Some are suspected of being carcinogenic, and others are gradually being banned after having poisoned people and the ecosystem.
Source: CRIIGEN Press Release
However, health agencies consider that a high proportion of laboratory animals are predisposed to developing many diseases, based on industrial data archives known as “historical control data”. According to these data, 13–71% of the animals would spontaneously or naturally present mammary tumors and 26–93% pituitary tumors, and the kidney function of these animals would frequently be deficient. This prevents the attribution of observed toxic effects to the products tested, and requires the sacrifice of a large number of animals in an attempt to observe statistically significant results in carcinogenicity tests, for example. But often, doubt persists and the product remains on the market. Do these diseases originate from genetic or environmental factors?
To investigate this question, the team of Professor Gilles-Eric Séralini of the University of Caen, supported by CRIIGEN, analyzed the dried feed of laboratory animals using standard methods and with the help of accredited laboratories. These animal feeds, sourced from five continents, are generally considered balanced and hygienic. The study was exceptionally wide-ranging; it investigated 13 samples of commonly used laboratory rat feeds for traces of 262 pesticides, 4 heavy metals, 17 dioxins and furans, 18 PCBs and 22 GMOs.
The results wereoverwhelming. All the feeds contained significant concentrations of several of these products, at levels likely to cause serious diseases and disrupt the hormonal and nervous system of the animals. This hides the effects of the products tested. For example, residues of the most widely used pesticide in the world, consisting of glyphosate and highly toxic adjuvants, such as Roundup, were detected in 9 of the 13 diets. Eleven of the 13 diets contained GMOs that are grown with large amounts of Roundup.
It should be noted that one of these feeds was used in DuPont’s regulatory study on GM Roundup-tolerant oilseed rape. The type of feed given to the control animals in the DuPont study was found to contain significant amounts of Roundup residues, at levels known to cause toxic effects. The study concluded that the oilseed rape in question was safe, yet it is obviously flawed.
It therefore appears that the long-term consumption of contaminated feed interferes with good experimental practice and that the cause of diseases and disorders found in laboratory rats has been too quickly attributed to the genetic characteristics of the species used. Contrary to the assertions of the health agencies, these diseases cannot be called “spontaneous or natural”. Further, the new study shows that the results of a number of regulatory toxicology tests conducted to date are highly questionable. Does the new study bring us a step closer to understanding the compromises and laxity of the methods of some experts?
In this way, countless industrial products that are potentially dangerous for public health have been helped onto the market.
Published inPLOS ONE (June 2015) – Link coming soon.
Laboratory rodent diets contain toxic levels of environmental contaminants: Implications for regulatory tests.
Authors: Robin Mesnage and Nicolas Defarge*, Louis-Marie Rocque, Joel Spiroux de Vendômois, and Gilles-Eric Séralini.
* These authors contributed equally to this work and should both be considered as first authors
By admin|June 17th, 2015|Media coverage|0Comments
相关文章
头条焦点
精彩导读
关注我们
【查看完整讨论话题】 | 【用户登录】 | 【用户注册】