An INRA meta-analysis on a GMO shows that 40% of the studies present conflicts of interest of a financial nature.
Some want to pave the way for genetically modified organisms (GMOs) because they promise us many opportunities; they call for intensifying research, in particular to avoid all the health and environmental pitfalls that they themselves carry. This research still has to be reliable and independent… which is far from being the case.
Researchers from INRA (National Institute for Agronomic Research) are interested in the links of interest between research on genetically modified plants and the main industries which develop and market these plants (Monsanto, Syngenta, Dow AgroSciences and DuPont Pioneer ).
Favorable publications
Their meta-analysis covers 672 articles published between 1991 and 2015 in peer-reviewed scientific journals – a pledge, theoretically, of their seriousness. These studies looked at the effectiveness or durability (maintenance of this effectiveness over time) of GMO Bt plants. These transgenic plants (in particular corn, cotton and soybeans) produce proteins from a bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis, toxic against insects that infest them.
Analysis of this literature shows that 40% of publications on this subject present a financial conflict of interest: “the studies presented in these publications were carried out or financed, in whole or in part, by the biotechnology industries which develop and sell these plants ”, specify the authors in a communicated from INRA.
Even more annoying: for publications presenting a conflict of interest, the conclusions are more frequently favorable to the interests of the seed industries (+ 50%) than for those without a conflict of interest.
“This general trend holds true at the researcher level,” the authors explain. Thus, the conclusions of the publications of the same researcher on the same subject are on average more often favorable to the interests of the biotechnology industries for publications presenting a conflict of interest.
“Strong societal impact”
“The analyzes carried out do not make it possible to determine whether financial conflicts of interest are the cause of the greater frequency of conclusions favorable to the interests of the biotechnology industries”, observe the researchers, cautious, who nevertheless stress that “the causal effect conflicts of interest on the conclusions of scientific publications have been demonstrated in other fields (tobacco, energy, pharmacology) ”.
The authors of the article encourage scientific journals to explicitly report on the financial conflicts of interest present in the studies. They also propose, to avoid these conflicts, to set up a research fund which, while being financially supported by the industries concerned, would be independent of it when choosing the studies to be financed.
“Society expects transparent and impartial scientific production from researchers, particularly when the subjects addressed have, for ethical, economic or health reasons, a strong societal repercussion. The use of transgenic plants is one of these subjects, particularly within the European Union, ”the authors further state.
.
