Why we don't publish the authors of the soil ecology article:

"Genetically Engineered Crops - A Threat to Soil Fertility?"

The article was drafted already in spring 1999. Initially a leading soil ecologists promised to contribute, finding the hypothesis very important. But due to pressure from a colleage at the same institute, this scientist withdrew. We then contacted several other leading soil experts. Only one of them was critical to the article, but in a very indiscriminate and emotional way. Three of those whom we contacted contributed with important viewpoints. One of them, recognized as a world authority in this field, actually made the most extensive and important contributions of all co-authors.

However none of the soil experts wanted to contribute openly even if they supported the article. This is understandable as the article presents a hypothesis that gives a reason for great concerns about the cultivation of GE plants. If proven correct it would mean multibillion losses to the biotech industry.

Even if, from a strictly scientific standpoint, it is fully justified to propose this hypothesis, there is a risk that especially the soil experts will be persecuted for supporting it.

The biotech proponents have already created a "warning example" in the treatment of the world leading food safety expert, Dr. Arpad Pusztai, who similarly threatened their interests by warning that the principle for approving GE foods was inadequate, see "Leading Scientist sacked after presidential intervention". (Yet his warning was scientifically jusitified and is supported by important scientific organizations).

This is an instance of the powerful tacit censoring influence of the mighty corporations that sponsor science to a rapidly growing extent (for more about this serious problem, see "Dysfunctional science")

Addition 14 dec 2010

Increasing persecution of critical scientists

In recent years a number of scientists critical to GMO have been persecuted and harassed including two of the contributors to this article.

For more about persecution, see: http://www.psrast.org/criticssuppr.htm. The latest case is Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini, a top expert whose critical papers has lead to an intense campaign where even the European Food Safety Authority (famed for its bias in favor of GMOs) participates. See "Defend Gilles-Eric Séralini and Transparency in GMO Risk Assessment!"

As this paper would no doubt lead to serious persecution of the contributors, PSRAST thinks we should not publicise the names of the authors at all.

SUGGESTION: Establish a Anonymous Scientific Journal

We think the anonumou publication of articles should be made possible in fields where it has been documented that critics have been exposed to persecution. This includes genetic engineering and mobile phone technology.

The journal should be peer reviewed and a scientist or a small group of scinteists or science journalists with high integrity would guarantee that the authors are competent scientists keeping the names of the authors strictly secret.

We think this might foster the surfacing of many critical and revealing articles in the fields where suppression of facts occur.

The special competence of the non-soil ecology experts (their fields were a/o microbial ecology, horizontal gene transfer, genetics, gene flow and agriculture) has been necessary and valuable, because the nature of the issue requires an interdisciplinary team. Still it has been impossible to publish their names in an article, where no specialist in the main subject field of "soil ecology" has contributed, without risking their reputation. So therefore we been unable to publish it and [Dec 2010] we decided, as said not to publish it unless a journal is created that enables anonymous publication as suggested above.

Because of the potentially serious complications warned for in the article, we felt in 1999 we could not take the responsibility to wait any more for willing soil ecologists to turn up. Therefore it was published, without disclosing the names of any of the authors. This is no doubt a highly unusual measure. We hope that nevertheless the facts and ideas presented will be seriously considered.

It is, after all, the message and not the messengers that is really important in scientific literature.

On behalf of the scientist group who contributed the article

This page was published on March 21, 2001. Updated on Dec 14, 2010.

Jaan Suurküla M.D.,
editor of the article

Physicians and Scientists for Responsible Application of
Science and Technology (PSRAST)

To the article "Genetically Engineered Crops - A Threat to Soil Fertility?" [AL]