Biosafety boss warns against GMO ban lift

The National Biosafety Authority, which is charged with advising the government on the safety of genetically modified organisms has warned against ignoring the study that led to the ban in the first place.

“Though (the) Seralini paper has been withdrawn, the importance of his results should not be denied or ignored,” the authority’s chief executive officer, Dr Willy Tonui said in a statement amid mounting pressure on the government to lift the ban on importation of GMO foods, following the retraction of a study that had linked the technology to cancer.

A group of Kenyan scientists drawn from research institutions and universities Monday called for reversal of the decision to forestall a looming food shortage.

“GMOs are not a threat to human health since they are consumed in major countries and are scientifically proven to be safe,” said Dr Joel Ochieng of the University of Nairobi.

Fresh demands to legalise GMOs follow last week’s withdrawal of a study on which the government based its decision to ban the technology through the then minister for Public Health Ms Beth Mugo.

The study by French scientist Gilles-Eric Seralini claimed that rats fed on a diet containing NK603 — a seed variety made tolerant to the spraying of Roundup — died of cancer earlier than those on a standard diet.

However, the journal of Food Chemical Toxicology that had published it discredited the study saying it was inconclusive.

“Only Kenya banned GMO on the basis of the study,” Dr Florence Wambugu of Africa Harvest said.

Illicit, unscientific

Meanwhile, GMWatch has taken the journal’s editor, Dr A. Wallace Hayes to task over the manner in which it retracted the Séralini paper, stating, it was “illicit, unscientific, and unethical”.

“It violates the guidelines for retractions in scientific publishing set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics,” GMWatch said.

The guidelines state that the only grounds for a journal to retract a paper are that there should be clear evidence that the findings are unreliable due to misconduct (eg data fabrication) or honest error; plagiarism or redundant publication.

None of the above criteria were applied before the retraction, the Nation has learned.