The petitioners, from every continent representing more than 40 countries, are urging transparency in the promotion of sound science on important issues of public health. They are joining calls by regulatory bodies including the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) to Seralini and his collaborators at the Committee for Research & Independent Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN) to provide the research data to back up their allegations of health and safety risks links to GMOs.

'The serious demands by Seralini that regulatory bodies and the public make decisions about how food is grown based on his report require that he be transparent about the means and measures by which he has drawn conclusions,' said Klaus Ammann, PhD, professor plant systems, Biosafety Committee of the Government of Switzerland, Chairman EFB Section on Biodiversity, University of Bern, Switzerland notes,.  'Anything less than the normal, full disclosures of data, leaves us all victims of political manipulation and highly theatrical propaganda – this is not science.'

'The basic code of scientific ethics requires that scientists release all data associated with a peer reviewed scientific paper,' noted Bruce Chassy, PhD, professor emeritus, Food Science & Nutrition, University of Illinois, United States.

'The claims made by this study contradict an extensive body of  independent and widely accepted scientific research,' said C.S. Prakash, PhD, Professor, Plant Molecular Genetics, Tuskegee University.  'The few details shared about the Seralini study indicate significant flaws in common research and analytical practices, the only way to take this seriously is to allow an open review of the data behind these claims.' 

Hundreds of scientists are pointing to the recent findings by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the German Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food safety (BVL) and the Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) which concluded that the Seralini's deductions are not justified because of shortcomings in study design, data evaluation and presentation methods. In the absence of disclosure, the petitioning scientists are calling on the publishing journal editors to retract the Seralini study.  

Petition link: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/dr-seralini-please-release-data/signatureshttp://www.ipetitions.com/petition/dr-seralini-please-release-data/signatures