Dr. Seralini - Please release data from your biotech corn study

Signatures 765 total

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, ... 16 › »

1. 151
   Name: Dr. Robert Boehm on Sep 24, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
2. 152
   Name: Derek Burke on Sep 24, 2012

   Comments: I know from experience the importance of giving all the detailed data for all animal feeding experiments that assess toxicity. You make an important claim; you must validate it by showing all the data, otherwise you lose crediblity.

   Flag
3. 153
   Name: Timo Wolf on Sep 24, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
4. 154
   Name: Francisco G. Nobrega on Sep 24, 2012

   Comments: No comments !

   Flag
5. 155
   Name: Roelf Renkema on Sep 24, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
6. 156
   Name: Jan Demolder on Sep 24, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
7. 157
   Name: Christian Fankhauser on Sep 24, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
8. 158
   Name: Tom Sheldon on Sep 24, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
9. 159
   Name: Nathalie Verbruggen on Sep 24, 2012

   Comments:

   Flag
10. 160
    Name: Dr. Guenther Buchholz on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
11. 161
    Name: Kevin Titeca on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
12. 162
    Name: Prof Huw D Jones on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments: It's simple. It's called peer-review. It's how science works!

    Flag
13. 163
    Name: Herb Aldwinckle on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
14. 164
    Name: Eduardo Romano De Campos Pinto on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
15. 165
    Name: Steven H. Strauss on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
16. 166
    Name: Eduardo Blumwald on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
17. 167
    Name: David John James on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
18. 168
    Name: David John James on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
19. 169
    Name: Joerg Bauer on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
20. 170
    Name: Marie-Theres Hauser on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments: There are obviously statistical problems in this study since on Figure 1 there are more males surviving once they are feed with higher GMO dosis. Also round-up at higher concentrations in the drinking water seems to have a higher survival rate. The higher incidence of mortality in females seems to be also not dose dependent - since higher dosis reduce the mortality. Probably the cohort of 10 rats was not powerful enough to distinguish real trends from noise in this study.

    Flag
21. 171
    Name: Josef Schmidt on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
22. 172
    Name: Dr. Wolfgang Löffelhardt on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
23. 173
    Name: Marc Lemmens on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
24. 174
    Name: Prof. Dr. Thomas Roitsch on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
25. 175
    Name: Silfa Zoidberg on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
26. 176
    Name: Juanse Barros on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments: for the benefit of beekeeping and science in general .

    Flag
27. 177
    Name: Catia Nunes on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments: Science has to be transparent.

    Flag
28. 178
    Name: Jeremy Sweet on Sep 24, 2012

    Comments: total disclosure of all raw data is a requirement for all toxicology studies conducted under GLP and so should not be a problem for genuine and honest scientists

    Flag
29. 179
    Name: Dr Richard Glatz on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments: Transparency of raw data is fundamental to scientific process and published science; it underpins community confidence in decisions based on science.

    Flag
30. 180
    Name: Marcia Almeida De Melo on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
31. 181
    Name: Zdenka Svobodova on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
32. 182
    Name: Dr Gerhard Obermeyer on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
33. 183
    Name: Georg Seifert on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments: First and foremost the Food and Chemical Toxicology people deserve outspoken criticism for accepting the 'no conflicts of interest claim' made by the authors. Given the declared agenda of CRIIGEN this is absolutely ridiculous and rubbishes the entire idea of this declaration.

    Flag
34. 184
    Name: Julia Lafferty on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
35. 185
    Name: Peter Hietz on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
36. 186
    Name: Prof. Annette Schürmann on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
37. 187
    Name: Eoin O'Callaghan on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
38. 188
    Name: Bistrich Herbert on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
39. 189
    Name: Dr. Herta Steinkellner on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
40. 190
    Name: Raimund Tenhaken on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
41. 191
    Name: Dr. Frederik Boernke on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
42. 192
    Name: Anonymous on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
43. 193
    Name: Dr. Frank P. Wolter on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
44. 194
    Name: Anonymous on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
45. 195
    Name: Anonymous on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
46. 196
    Name: Dr. Alfons Weig on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
47. 197
    Name: Anonymous on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
48. 198
    Name: Dr. Wolfram Adlassnig on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag
49. 199
    Name: Peer Staehler on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments: We need an honest and new debate, as it is not belief and will that counts, but real sustainability - and the blind hate against GM in plants does not serve that purpose at all!

    Flag
50. 200
    Name: Louis-Marie Houdebine on Sep 25, 2012

    Comments:

    Flag

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, ... 16 › »