Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

When bad science makes good headlines: Bt maize and regulatory bans

Nature Biotechnology volume 31, pages 386–387 (2013)Cite this article

Subjects

To the Editor:

The safety of transgenic crops and derived foods continues to be a contentious issue of public and political debate. The debate is confounded when poorly designed studies that report unusual and controversial results receive a disproportionate amount of attention in the scientific and lay press, which in turn, influences both public policy and perceptions about agbiotech. This is illustrated by the selective reporting of scientific literature in some European countries to support moratoria on the cultivation of MON810, a transgenic maize expressing the Cry1Ab insecticidal protein isolated from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). Countries, such as France and Germany, have put these moratoria in place, even though the GMO Panel of the European Food Safety Authority has concluded that MON810 is unlikely to have any adverse effect on the environment in the context of its intended uses1.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. European Food Safety Authority. EFSA J. 1149, 1–85 (2009). <http://www.efsa.europa.eu/de/scdocs/doc/1149.pdf/>

  2. Romeis, J. et al. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 203–208 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Sanvido, O. et al. Environ. Sci. Policy 15, 82–91 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Consensus document on safety information on transgenic plants expressing Bacillus thuringiensis - derived insect control protein. Series on Harmonisation of Regulatory Oversight in Biotechnology, No. 42 <http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/36/61/46815888.pdf/> (2007).

  5. Romeis, J., Meissle, M. & Bigler, F. Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 63–71 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Marvier, M. et al. Science 316, 1475–1477 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Wolfenbarger, L.L. et al. PLoS ONE 3, e2118 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Naranjo, S.E. CAB Rev. Perspect. Agric. Vet. Sci. Nutr. Nat. Resour. 4, No. 011 (2009).

  9. Romeis, J. et al. Transgenic Res. 20, 1–22 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Bøhn, T. et al. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 55, 584–592 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Rosi-Marshall, E.J. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104, 16204–16208 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Schmidt, J.E.U. et al. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 56, 221–228 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hilbeck, A. et al. Environ. Entomol. 27, 1255–1263 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. European Commission. Rules on GMOs in the EU—Ban on GMOs cultivation. <http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biotechnology/gmo_ban_cultivation_en.htm/>

  15. Anonymous. Germany: Minister Aigner bans MON810 Bt maize. GMO Compass <http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/news/432.germany_aigner_bans_mon810_bt_maize.html/> (14 April 2009)

  16. Jaffe, G. Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 748–749 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Shelton, A.M. & Sears, M.K. Plant J. 27, 483–488 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. OGTR. Risk Analysis Framework <http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/Content/raf-3/$FILE/raffinal4.pdf/> (Australian Government, Office of the Gene Technology Regulator, 2009).

  19. Séralini, G.-E. et al. Food Chem. Toxicol. 50, 4221–4231 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. European Food Safety Authority. EFSA J. 10, 2986 (2012).

  21. Food Standards Australia New Zealand. Response to Séralini paper on the long term toxicity of Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. <http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/consumerinformation/gmfoods/gmfactsheetsandpublications/responsetosralinipap5676.cfm/> (2012).

  22. Health Canada. Health Canada and Canadian Food Inspection Agency statement on the Séralini et al. (2012) publication on a 2-year rodent feeding study with glyphosate formulations and GM maize NK603. <http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/gmf-agm/seralini-eng.php/> (2012).

  23. Butler, D. Nature 490, 158 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Houllier, F. Nature 491, 327 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank S.E. Naranjo and R.L. Hellmich (USDA-ARS) for the many constructive discussions that helped to develop this paper and for critical comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript. Furthermore, we would like to acknowledge helpful comments provided by the following readers: F. Bigler and M. Meissle (Agroscope ART) and Y. Devos (European Food Safety Authority).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART, Zurich, Switzerland

    Jörg Romeis

  2. Center for Environmental Risk Assessment, ILSI Research Foundation, Washington, DC, USA

    Morven A McLean

  3. Cornell University/New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Geneva, New York, USA

    Anthony M Shelton

Authors
  1. Jörg Romeis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Morven A McLean
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anthony M Shelton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jörg Romeis.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Text and Figures

Supplementary Notes (PDF 175 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Romeis, J., McLean, M. & Shelton, A. When bad science makes good headlines: Bt maize and regulatory bans. Nat Biotechnol 31, 386–387 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2578

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2578

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Translational Research

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Translational Research newsletter — top stories in biotechnology, drug discovery and pharma.

Get what matters in translational research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Translational Research