Another study challenges controversial, retracted Séralini paper suggesting GMO corn causes cancer

Screen Shot at AM
One of Séralini's rats

Do you remember those spectacular images of rats fed GMO corn with invasive cancers, so big that the tumors looked like balls under the animals’ hair? They were exhibited on television, in films and books in September 2012.

Yes, you remember. But do you know that on December 10, the journal Toxicology Sciences published a study showing that GMO corn has no “biologically meaningful effects” on rats? Probably not.

Let’s go back to September 2012 …. [T]he team of journalists …. mobilized to cover this event did not …. need other experts on the subject to judge the solidity of the thesis presented by Professor Gilles-Eric Séralini—that rats fed corn genetically engineered to tolerate glyphosate developed cancer—which contradicted many studies already published.

The information available all goes in the same direction: eating maize made tolerant to glyphosate, or containing the toxin Bt (from a common bacterium), or conventional corn, doesn’t impact the health of rats.

To translate this language into clearer terms: some participants in these dialogues are not willing to give up their original affirmations …. because their belief is actually rooted in  economic, social or even moral arguments, for which compromise is not envisaged.

[Editor’s note: This article was originally published in French. This summary was prepared with Google Translate and edited for clarity.]

Read full, original article: GMO-poisons? The true end of the Séralini affair

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot-2026-04-20-at-2.26.27-PM
Viewpoint — Food-fear world: The latest activist scientists campaign: Cancer-causing additives
Screenshot-2026-05-01-at-11.56.24-AM
‘Science moves forward when people are willing to think differently’: Memories of DNA maverick Craig Venter
Screenshot-2026-04-03-at-11.15.51-AM
Paraben panic: How a flawed study, media hype, and chemophobia convinced the public of the danger of one of the safest classes of preservatives
Screenshot-2026-03-13-at-12.14.04-PM
The FDA wants to make many popular prescription drugs OTC—a great idea. Here’s why it’s unlikely to happen
ChatGPT-Image-May-1-2026-02_20_13-PM
How RFK, Jr.’s false vaccine claims are holding up $600 million to fight diseases in poor countries
viva-la-vida-watermelons
Misinformation and climate change are endangering summer watermelons
Screenshot-2026-04-30-at-2.19.37-PM
5 myths about summer dehydration that could damage your health — or even kill you
Drinking lots of water can help reduce the effects of aging
Nanoplastics in drinking water: MAHA activists forge science-based bipartisan coalition 
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-27-2026-11_27_05-AM
The myths of “process”: What science says about the “dangers’ of synthetic products and ultra-processed foods
79d03212-2508-45d0-b427-8e9743ff6432
Viewpoint: The Casey Means hustle—Wellness woo opportunism dressed up as medical wisdom
Screenshot-PM-24
Viewpoint: The herbicide glyphosate isn’t perfect. Banning it would be far worse.
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.