Message

 

 

From: GOLDSTEIN, DANIEL A 
Sent: 9/29/2012 9:30:35 PM
To: SACHS, ERIC 5 HAMMOND, BRUCE 

LEMKE, SHAWNA LIN 
HEYDENS, WILLIAM 
DAVID A 
VICINI, JOHN 


Subject: RE: URGENT: Quick Response Needed

Serry? my ($009 e~rrieii is dawn?: just saw this.

rem net en SECS guru? but here gees?

ie Sid days yen are Seeking; for tdxieefdgy and rnest enirneis wiif stey beeitby in centrdi greeps: As yen ed fe iifefirne: two
things bended a Edi: rndre enirneis die {net eii~ yen seerifiee at end df study befdre 109% and yer: begin be see
backgrennd end less fredeent enteemes. There is tires need fer greater bi fe assure stetistieei brewer te discriminate
better en these endpeints.

ibis is any ntber statistical design prebiern? tire rnere neiee year have {variance} in the test and Centrei tire greater 
needed to stetistirzeiiy significant difference as {ice use statistics es en not efweys
tbe rigid: test fer srneif Ni- fne sfenderd errdr of tbe rrieen {sensitivity te difference ernerig meens} is sigma sedered ever
N.

San

From: SACHS, ERIC 1000] 

Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2012 5:54 AM

To: HAMMOND, BRUCE 1000] GOLDSTEIN, DANIEL A 1000]; LEMKE, SHAWNA LIN 1000] HEYDENS,
WILLIAM 1000] SALTMIRAS, DAVID A 1000] VICINI, JOHN 1000]

Subject: URGENT: Quick Response Needed

See question below. We need to help explain why 10 rats/sex/treatment is appropriate for 90? day studies but not for

much longer studies.

This is urgent.

Eric Sachs
Regulatory Policy Scientific Affairs


Mobile:?

_@monsanto.com

Original 

From: Selim E-g?sabanc?un?ve?u]

Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2012 05:34 AM Central Standard Time
To: AgBioChatter@

Cc: Andrew Apel

Subject: Re: Chatter: Founder of CRIIGEN defends Seralini

Dear All,

Corinne LePage's claims are now at GMWatch web site and widely

 

used by the antis.
I would appreciate some clarification on her claims especially the following ones that I used in my critique of Seralini's
paper with the journalists. This was also one of the strongest points of the letter sent to Dr. Hayes.

"The strain of rats selected is not appropriate" Interesting critique when you know it is the same strain as that used by
Monsanto in its studies, which served as a basis for authorisations issued in Europe. If this strain is not valid then all
authorisations must be withdrawn as they are based on ineffective tests.

"The number of animals tested per group were insufficient" Except that no study has ever been conducted on as many
animals (200) and the number of rats per group (10 [in Seralini's case, it was 10 of each sex]) is the same as the number
used in all studies submitted to public bodies and validated by them comment: Monsanto used 20 rats per group
in its 90-day study on NK603 but reportedly only analysed 10! See: de Vendomois, J. S., F. Roullier, et al. (2009). A
comparison of the effects of three GM corn varieties on mammalian health. Biol Sci 706?726. 50 Lepage is
correct in saying that no industry tests on a GMO submitted for approval have analysed more than 10 rats per group].
Consequently if that number does not allow conclusions to be drawn, then none of the studies that served for GMO
authorisations could be taken into account either.

Thanks

Selim

On 24.09.2012 23:27, Andrew Apel wrote:

Corinne LePage, founder of CRIIGEN, strikes back at critics of
Seralini's rat study. The original, just published by the Huf?ngton
Post, is in French. This link should give you an automatic translation
of the page: 

 

Selim Cetiner, Ph. D.
Professor

SabanCi University

Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences
Orhanli, Tuzla 34956

Istanbul, Turkey

E?mail edu

Phone 

Telefax 

Remix; to semis?" i Rania; to smug; Rsn?y sis was nest Start a New ?E?s-nit:

 

Messages in this tank: 

 



Essays ?em?ms?s

?g?our {Imus}