Dos investigaciones sobre la manipulación de información científica respecto a los OGM

 Les presentamos 2 bonitas investigaciones, la primera fue publicada en la revista internacional FOOD POLICY en 2011 por científicos Portugueses http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VCB-51S6FY9-1/2/08d7c6d3dab663671
Lla segunda publicada este año en la revista PLOS BIOLOGY por cientifico de Noruega:
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001499.). Donde  demuestran las falacias que han creado con otra blioblioteca de la pseudociencia financiada por las corporaciones de los agronegocios para que los países cómplices o socios sigan apostando a los OGM. 

1) 

Abstract

Since the first commercial cultivation of genetically modified crops in 1994, the rapidly expanding market of genetically modified seeds has given rise to a multibillion dollar industry. This fast growth, fueled by high expectations towards this new commercial technology and shareholder trust in the involved industry, has provided strong incentives for further research and development of new genetically modified plant varieties. Considering, however, the high financial stakes involved, concerns are raised over the influence that conflicts of interest may place upon articles published in peer-reviewed journals that report on health risks or nutritional value of genetically modified food products. In a study involving 94 articles selected through objective criteria, it was found that the existence of either financial or professional conflict of interest was associated to study outcomes that cast genetically modified products in a favorable light (p = 0.005). While financial conflict of interest alone did not correlate with research results (p = 0.631), a strong association was found between author affiliation to industry (professional conflict of interest) and study outcome (p < 0.001). We discuss these results by comparing them to similar studies on conflicts of interest in other areas, such as biomedical sciences, and hypothesize on dynamics that may help explain such connections.

2)

Confidential business information (CBI) is a necessary tool to protect commercial interests in the rapidly developing field of gene technology. CBI is also often claimed for documentation and materials supporting the biosafety assessments of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) intended for environmental release, food, and feed use. However, such claims oftentimes marginally serve their legitimate purpose to protect commercial interests and unnecessarily limit transparency and public peer review of data submitted to regulatory authorities. CBI and proprietary claims also restrict access to transgene sequence data, transgenic seeds, and other GMO materials, which precludes the development of independent research and monitoring strategies. In the long run, such claims are counterproductive to the safe and responsible commercial development of GM technology as they hinder the accumulation of biosafety data in the open, peer-reviewed literature, which is needed for both public and scientific consensus-building on safety issues and for improvements to the risk-assessment procedure itself. The increasing recognition of conflicts of interest as an invariable part of market-oriented safety-data production, interpretation, and risk communication also calls for transparency and open access to safety-related data and assessments.