Historic posts are reprinted verbatim from their original source.

Professor Brian Goodwin, scholar in residence, Schumacher College
Dr. Stanley Ewen, consultant histopathologist at the University of Aberdeen Medical School
Dr. Vyvyan Howard, Head of Research in Fetal and Infant Toxico-Pathology at the University of Liverpool
February 14, 1999

“I find Dr. Pusztai’s conclusions to be entirely consistent with the data presented in his alternative report. I find it deeply regretful that Dr. Pusztai’s conclusions were not presented by the Director of the Rowett Research Institute to the House of Lords Select Committee on Science And Technology as a minority report presenting evidence that there are grounds for concern in the use of genetically engineered foods and a need for further research into their effects on mammals. I regret that there has been no attempt by the Rowett Research Institute to re-establish Dr. Pusztai’s high scientific credentials with the media after the damage done to him by the Director in reporting publicly that Dr. Pusztai was responsible for producing confusion and muddle about the results and implications, a charge later withdrawn. This is the most serious damage that any scientist can suffer and it requires rectification.”
Professor Brian Goodwin, scholar in residence, Schumacher College

“I believe that the results obtained indicate major potential problems that could amount to adverse affects tantamount to food hazard. The audit report seriously underplays the hazards revealed by these experiments and diverts the testing of food safety to unspecified regulatory procedures. Great potential risk has been highlighted. Simple toxicity experiments would not have revealed these dangers. Urgent attention must be given to demonstrating that the vector used (in all GE food currently available in the UK) does not cause analogous structural changes within the mammalian gut. Careful study of this report leads me to conclude that essential data concerning organ weights have been withheld. The missing data on organ weights does raise the possibility of deliberate cover-up by the persons collating the (audit) report data.”
Dr. Stanley Ewen, consultant histopathologist at the University of Aberdeen Medical School

“Caution in developing robust and exhaustive hazard assessments for potentially irreversible changes to staple constituents of the human food chain is essential. The final opinion of the audit committee that ‘The existing data does not support any suggestion that the consumption by rats of transgenic potatoes expressing GNA has an effect on growth organ development or immune function’ is surprising. A major problem with the (audit) report is that the authors have been selective with the data they have included, which makes an objective appraisal of their conclusions impossible from solely reading the audit report. I have the impression from reading the audit report that it was hastily compiled and systematically biased towards brushing aside your experimental findings. I feel that it is urgent that the full data from these experiments should be brought into the public arena and debated. The sequelae of your findings are of considerable importance in the current debate on the safety and hazard assessment of genetically modified foods.”
Dr. Vyvyan Howard, Head of Research in Fetal and Infant Toxico-Pathology at the University of Liverpool