In fact, the results of the GRACE, G-TwYST and OGM90 + studies do not call into question the results of the "Séralini 2012" study because the protocols and objectives are too different. The Séralini study was a two-year general toxicology study investigating the effects of Roundup-tolerant GM maize and those of the associated herbicide. This was followed by 4 peer-reviewed publications implementing transcriptomic, proteomic and metabolomic techniques. These studies have shown, among other things, the absence of substantial equivalence between this GM maize and its non-transgenic counterpart, as well as liver diseases (liver steatosis) in animals that have consumed very low doses (less than that allowed in drinking water) of a glyphosate herbicide (all these studies are available at http://www.criigen.org).
With a total of 15 million euros of public money, the GRACE study looked at another GMO, insecticide (Bt) and non-tolerant to Roundup, and although the G-TwYST and OGM 90+ studies did evaluate the same GMO as the Séralini study, their objectives and protocols are very different from the latter. And for good reason! The G-TwYST study aimed to assess carcinogenicity, a more specific question that was addressed for 2 years, but its study of general toxicology (with urine and regular blood tests) did not exceed one year, instead of 2 years in the Séralini study. As for the OGM90 + study, despite the implementation of techniques called "omics", it was limited to 90 days, as the name suggests, and answered a different problem.
Another fundamental difference lies in the choice of the strain of rats: Sprague-Dawleys in the Séralini study (as in most toxicology study), Wistars in the 3 others. Their sensitivity is different, especially with regard to mammary tumors such as fibroadenomas whose incidence was shown to be increased in the treated rats in the Séralini study. This is why the Sprague-Dawley strain is recommended by the American Toxicology Program (NTP) for this type of research because of their sensitivity that better reflects that of human populations.
More importantly, the pesticide component of the Séralini study, namely the long-term effects of a Roundup formulation of glyphosate-based herbicide, was not included in any of these studies. And the Séralini study remains the only one in the world to have evaluated the effects of chronic consumption of low doses of a pesticide in its commercial formulation. These results remain in the scientific corpus, and have never been questioned or invalidated.
Once again lobbies are trying to divert the debate about the serious public health risks of products that regularly contaminate our ecosystems and our food and that are found in the blood and urine of the world's population.