Reports on effect of foods on test animals released

All of the controversial research reports which claimed that genetically modified foods caused damage to test animals have been released for public scrutiny.

The opening up of the work of Dr Arpad Pusztai by his former employers, the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen, represents a remarkable departure from standard scientific practice. Results are usually scrutinised by independent reviewers before publication.

Yesterday's release came about because of the "intense publicity" given to the researcher's claims last week in London that the institute had "limited Dr Pusztai's ability to express his concern about GMOs (genetically modified organisms)", the institute said in a press statement.

The institute released a report "prepared by Dr Pusztai himself" in which he defends his findings, and a report prepared by an audit committee at the request of the institute's director, Professor Philip James, the second such audit of Dr Pusztai's work.

Dr Pusztai's original work suggested that rats fed with modified potatoes suffered decreases in organ and brain weights and had weakened immune systems. The new audit said Dr Pusztai's claims were "untrue or not supported by the evidence."

It concluded: "The audit committee has taken congnisance of Dr Pusztai's views but remains of the opinion that there is nothing in his report or in the data seen by the committee which would lead them to modify the conclusion expressed in the original audit report."

Dr Pusztai's document, prepared in response to the first audit report completed last October, claimed the committee failed to take proper account of his analytical data.

He said last night that he was "elated" that the gag on his work had been lifted, but he was reluctant to discuss it in detail before he submitted it to a Commons committee for MPs to consider.

The institute said that Dr Pusztai was "no longer required to observe the usual conventions" that prevented "public disclosure of unpublished work," adding, "The institute can therefore no longer be responsible for his analyses or views."