Six out of 20 panel members failed to disclose financial conflicts of interest
Below is an important peer-reviewed paper on the report issued by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine in May 2016, titled “Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects”. The results of the new paper showed that six out of 20 of the panel members who wrote the report had one or more reportable financial conflicts of interest, none of which were disclosed in the report.
More on the National Academies’ report:
National Academy of Sciences GMO report fatally compromised by conflicts of interest
How the National Academy of Sciences misled the public over GMO food safety
No, "science" has not confirmed that GMOs are safe to eat
Comments on National Academy of Sciences’ report on GM crops
Conflicts of interest among committee members in the National Academies’ genetically engineered crop study
Sheldon Krimsky, Tim Schwab
PLOS One, 28 Feb 2017
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) publishes numerous reports each year that are received with high esteem by the scientific community and public policy makers. The NASEM has internal standards for selecting committee members that author its reports, mostly from academia, and vetting conflicts of interest. This study examines whether there were any financial conflicts of interest (COIs) among the twenty invited committee members who wrote the 2016 report on genetically engineered (GE) crops. Our results showed that six panel members had one or more reportable financial COIs, none of which were disclosed in the report. We also report on institutional COIs held by the NASEM related to the report. The difference between our findings and the NASEM reporting standards are discussed.
Originally Posted: gmwatch.org