There have been a series of scientific reports indicating side effects of transgenic Bt corn or potatoes on the animals. To quote a few:
1. In July 2008, Austrian researchers found that feeding rats a diet containing the transgenic corn NK603 x MON810 affected the reproduction of mice that was detected in 3rd and 4th generation in the reproductive assessment by continuous breeding (RACB) study design. Some effects on the kidneys were also observed.1
2. In November, 2008, Italian researchers concluded that “the consumption of Bt MON810 maize … induced alteration in intestinal and peripheral immune response of weaning and old mice.”2
3. In December 2009, Joël Spiroux de Vendômois et al., studied the rats with feeds of three main commercialized genetically modified (GM) maize (NK 603, MON 810, MON 863), which are present in food and feed in the world. They observed that it causes hepatorenal toxicity. Other effects were also noticed in the heart, adrenal glands, spleen and haematopoietic system.3
4. Mice fed potatoes engineered to produce the Bt toxin developed abnormal and damaged cells, as well as proliferative cell growth in the lower part of their small intestines (ileum).4
How can transgenic Bt food be considered “safe” when there are so many studies showing adverse effects of Bt foods? Some studies have shown adverse effects on 3rd generation at the earliest and that too by Reproductive Assessment by Continuous Breeding (RACB) study design. The toxicological studies done by Mahyco do not include studies beyond 90 days of exposure. How can we consider Bt brinjal “safe” without proper, multigeneration studies?
B. Variety of Adverse Effects Due to GM Food in General
Certain studies have shown that the GM food can change the cell structure itself! Two of them:
1. Researchers studied effect of feeding GM soybean on mice and found out that it caused significant modifications in the nuclei (irregularly shaped nuclei) in the hepatocytes of GM fed mice.5
2. Scientists studied pancreatic acinar cell nuclei on the mice fed on genetically Modified soybean. The modifications observed in pancreatic acinar cell nuclei of GM-fed mice could be related to the reduction in digestive enzyme synthesis and secretion and can influence the pancreatic metabolism in mouse.6
Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food consumption including infertility, immune dysregulation, accelerated aging, dysregulation of genes associated with cholesterol synthesis, insulin regulation, cell signalling, and protein formation, and changes in the liver, kidney, spleen and gastrointestinal system. There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. Animal studies also show altered structure and function of the liver, including altered lipid and carbohydrate metabolism as well as cellular changes that could lead to accelerated aging and possibly lead to the accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). One study, done by Kroghsbo et al., has shown that rats fed transgenic Bt rice trended to a dose related response for Bt specific IgA. Also, because of the mounting data, it is biologically plausible for Genetically Modified Foods to cause adverse health effects in humans.23
C. Increase in Allergic reactions
Allergic reactions occur when the immune system interprets something as foreign, different, and offensive, and reacts accordingly. All GM foods, by definition, have something foreign and different. And several studies show that they provoke reactions. To quote a few:
1. Rats fed Monsanto’s GM corn had a significant increase in blood cells related to the immune system.7
2. GM potatoes caused the immune system of rats to respond more slowly.8
3. GM peas provoked an inflammatory response in mice, suggesting that it might cause deadly allergic reactions in people.9
4. Scientists have demonstrated high immunogenicity of Cry1A proteins administered by intragastric route and cautioned the use of transgenic plants for human consumption.10
5. There have been reports of allergic reactions to Bt spray. The reaction was severe enough to cause hospitalisation in some of the cases.11,12,13
6. Bt toxin might also trigger reactions by skin contact. In 2005, a medical team reported that hundreds of agricultural workers in India are developing allergic symptoms when exposed to Bt cotton, but not when exposed to natural varieties.14
Although there may be many causes, it might be difficult to identify whether GM foods were triggering allergic responses in the population. Since our country does not conduct regular studies or keep careful records, we need to do allergic studies in great detail before GM food is permitted for human consumption.
D. GMOs are inherently unpredictable
It has been scientifically proved beyond doubt that genes are not carriers of a single trait. The effect of every gene is determined by the total situation in the cell. Therefore, the transfer of a single gene can not yield intended results and is inevitably unpredictable.
Insertion of transgene can lead to mutation, deletion and alterations of the genomic structure. All this can change RNA, protein, enzymes and other countless natural products in the organism. To cite an example,
The gene of soybean glycinin was transferred into potatoes with the aim to increase their protein content. However, the improvements in protein content or amino acid profile were minimal. In fact, the total protein content of the GM potatoes after the gene transfer became significantly less than that of the control line. Even more unfortunately, the contents of some vitamins were reduced while the amounts of both solanine and chaconine increased in the GM lines. In this light the claimed substantial equivalence of the GM and parent lines was not supported by the published results.15
As some of the changes are unpredictable and it is only possible to compare the known properties and constituents of GM and conventional plants. Unknown components are not looked for and in that case how can we analyse them?
Scientists have opined that just chemical analysis of macro/micronutrients and known toxins is at best inadequate and, at worst, dangerous. More sophisticated analytical methods need to be devised, such as mRNA fingerprinting, proteomics, secondary metabolite profiling and other profiling techniques.
Do we have facilities for this kind of studies? Are they mandatory at present? How are we going to label it safe without detailed investigations?
From Concerned Health Professionals for Biosafety in Food
January 19, 2010
To Shri Jairam Ramesh
Honourable Minister of State (Independent Charge)
Ministry of Environment and Forests
Government of India
Public Consultation on Bt Brinjal at AhmedabadThere have been a series of scientific reports indicating side effects of transgenic... more
This leaves no doubt about how immoral business is. I can't even quote all of the blatant PR written in this piece, but have been busy spreading a bit of knowledge there. There was no mention of farmer lawsuits, patent law forcing the buying of seeds, pushing out NON GMO farmers, intimidation of scientists, transgenic contamination, test results regarding their BT crops, Indian farmer suicides, deforestation of the Amazon, farmers in Latin America being pushed off their land for soy monocultures, Monsanto in Iraq and Afghanistan, Plan Colombia, government bribes, revolving Washington DC policy, nor pending lawsuits regarding PCBs and the Supreme Court. Just one big wet kiss for Monsanto. I am actually nauseated after reading it. So if you are so inclined, make a visit over there and read what Forbes had to say in their fluff piece. This is what billions in profits gotten from the blood and biodiversity of this planet will buy you. Oh, and of course, no sugary sweet ad would be complete unless those who actually know the science and who care about the planet were called "enemies."
excerpt:
"The enemies haven't disappeared entirely. A 2009 Union of Concerned Scientists study calculated that only 14% of recent corn-crop yield increases are due to genetically engineered Bt corn. Roundup-ready corn and soy seeds don't increase crop yield at all, it found. Genetic engineering of crops "is inherently risky," says Greenpeace Policy Director Marco Contiero. "We cannot recall crops that are released into the environment." He says Monsanto's dominance decreases seed biodiversity."
Enemies? Shame on you, Forbes.This leaves no doubt about how immoral business is. I can't even quote all of the... more
Jabalpur: On the eve of Gandhi Jayanti and in protest against the GM Corn open air field trial happening in Jabalpur, more than one thousand five hundred farmers from 20 districts of Madhya Pradesh gathered here today for a peaceful, non-violent demonstration and demanded that the state government declare Madhya Pradesh as a GM-Free state. The activists pointed out that the state government already took the progressive step of declaring that Madhya Pradesh would be made into an organic state. It follows naturally that there should be no GM crop trials or cultivation in the state, they pointed out.
Mr Jayant Verma of Hamara Beej Abhiyan said that companies like Monsanto were notorious for their anti-farmer activities and if GM seeds like Monsanto's GM Corn are allowed, farmers' rights over their seeds and therefore, their agriculture, would be seriously jeopardized. The state government should, as a real solution to the current agrarian distress in the state, should shift farmers towards low-cost, toxic-free ecological farming practices, he said.
The GM Corn trial underway in open air conditions in Jabalpur consists of Monsanto's proprietary technologies centred around herbicide tolerance and insect-resistance and has been sown with the permission of the Central Government. "Both Agriculture and Health are state subjects as per the Indian Constitution. The state government should immediately intervene and exercise its policy of making MP into an organic state", demanded Mr Nilesh Desai of Beej Swaraj Abhiyan.
It is also apparent that the state level apparatus laid down under the Environment Protection Act's 1989 Rules is missing in Madhya Pradesh.
"It is ridiculous to pump in crores of rupees for supporting rural employment in the form of NREGA and then take away existing employment potential in agriculture, especially for women and poor agricultural workers, by bringing in technologies like herbicide tolerance", stated Mr Brij Kishore Chaurasia of Adivasi Sushasan Sangh.
"GM crops do not increase yields as claimed by the industry and pro-GM scientists and it is apparent in the case of Bt Cotton in Madhya Pradesh. This technology, which is irreversible and uncontrollable, will be a bigger trap for farmers than the earlier corporate-driven agricultural technologies. The state government, for the sake of farmers and agricultural workers in Madhya Pradesh, should immediately destroy this trial plot and not allow any more trials in the state like other states like Kerala", said Mr Ishwar Tripathi of Bhartiya Kissan Union. "In this kind of neo-colonialism, agriculture and seeds have become the medium to enslave Indian farmers and we should resist this at all costs".
Mr Sachin Jain from the Right To Food Campaign, MP informed that GM foods are known to cause many adverse health effects and with such unsafe foods, a precautionary approach is the only way forward. He demanded that GM foods should be prohibited through the proposed Right to Food/National Food Security Act.
The protestors burnt the effigy of Monsanto and presented a memorandum in the name of the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh to the district authorities.
A traditional tribal ritual for banishing evil forces like Monsanto and GM Corn was also enacted by the tribal activists. Further, a funeral procession of GM Corn was taken up in a rally through the city. More than 40 networks, groups and organizations that joined this huge protest included: Coalition for a GM-Free MP, Beej Swaraj Abhiyan, Hamara Beej Abhiyan, Lok Jagriti Manch, Bhartiya Kissan Union, Dalit evam Adivasi Mahapanchayat, Right to Food Campaign, Madhyanchal Forum, Kissan Sangharsh Samiti, Jan Pahal, Nagarik Adhikar Manch, Bargi Bandh Visthapith evam Prabhavit Sangh, Adivasi Sushasan Sangh, etc.Jabalpur: On the eve of Gandhi Jayanti and in protest against the GM Corn open air... more
My latest instalment posted to the Green Blog. Thanks to Leah, producer of Current Green for giving this important information a voice.My latest instalment posted to the Green Blog. Thanks to Leah, producer of Current... more
Let the seed satyagraha begin. We need farmers everywhere, particulary here in America to do this. To stand up for biodiversity, the environment, and the health of all of us.Let the seed satyagraha begin. We need farmers everywhere, particulary here in America... more
Monsanto, the world's biggest seed company, said on Wednesday it hoped legal action to end Germany's ban on growing its genetically modified (GMO) maize would allow the variety to be sown for the 2009 harvest.
On Tuesday, Monsanto said it had started legal action against the decision on April 14 by German Agriculture Minister Ilse Aigner to ban cultivation and sale of Monanto's MON 810 GMO maize which stopped it being sown for this year's harvest.
Monsanto hoped a court decision would be available by mid-May which would permit the maize to be sown for this year's harvest, a Monsanto spokesman said.
An application for an urgent hearing had been made in a German district court. German maize is planted in April and May.
The company would contest the ban because it believed the decision damaged its legal rights as the European Union had approved the maize as safe, he said.
Aigner had said she decided to issue the ban as information showed there was a justifiable reason to believe GMO maize presented a danger to the environment.
Such decisions must be based on new scientific information, the Monsanto spokesman said.
"The explanation that we received from the BVL (German federal food safety agency) last Friday contains no new scientific findings and the study that the BVL puts forward has already been examined by the European Food Safety Authority and other agencies," he said.
The EFSA is the EU risk assessment agency for food and animal feed safety.
A spokesperson for Germany's Agriculture Ministry said: "We have taken note of this lawsuit, which is not a surprise." The ministry would not make detailed comment on legal cases.
The ban put Germany alongside France, Austria, Hungary, Greece and Luxembourg, which also banned MON 810 maize despite its approval by the EU as safe for commercial use in the bloc.
The EU Commission, the bloc's executive arm, has tried without success to get the bans in other countries lifted.Monsanto, the world's biggest seed company, said on Wednesday it hoped legal... more
How many studies will have to be performed to get GM ingredients listed on labels in the US? How much transgenic contamination? Environmental toxification? Where are the independent studies that conclude that GE foods unequiviocably do not contribute to allergies, diabetes, thyroid conditions, cancer, Morgellon's Disease, early puberty in children fed GM soy formula, and other diseases that have been on the rise since GM foods hit the market? Why is Monsanto and the FDA fighting consumer disclosure which is a democratic right of the people if these foods are safe?
Personally, I do not believe that GM foods are benign. I believe there are health effects to them that we are not being told about because it would hurt the profits of Monsanto and other agrbusiness /chemical/ poison making companies.The majority of the world is against genetic modification of food. The only ones really pushing it are governments and world organizations like the World Bank that seek to make profits. There is no real need for it except profit motive by chemical companies looking to exploit the poor and now the climate and food crises with their ethanol.
Yet, the U.S. government in collusion with Monsanto allows it to be sold in our country without disclosure to the public. I think that if labelling is not to be allowed on foods in this country containing their GM ingredients that there needs to be a MAJOR boycott in this country of all companies that sell any corn and soy processed foods. They then need to feel it where it will hurt THEM the most until they disclose the source of their ingredients. I am tired as a citizen of having to deal with the secrecy of a government that cares more about their own profits and political cronyism than the health and wellbeing of the American people and the environment. ANY food that is also a registered pesticide is not something I want my child or myself to consume.
____
From the article:
A study published today by the Austrian government identified serious health threats of genetically engineered (GE) crops. In one of the very few long-term feeding studies ever conducted with GE crops, the fertility of mice fed with GE maize was found to be severely impaired, with fewer offspring being produced than by mice fed on natural crops. Considering the severity of the potential threat to human health and reproduction, Greenpeace is demanding a recall of all GE food and crops from the market, worldwide.
The study, sponsored by the Austrian Ministries for Agriculture and Health, was presented today at a scientific seminar in Vienna, Austria. Prof. Dr. Jürgen Zentek, Professor for Veterinary Medicine at the University of Vienna and lead author of the study, summarised the findings: Mice fed with GE maize had less offspring in the third and fourth generations, and these difference were statistically significant. Mice fed with non-GE maize reproduced more efficiently. This effect can be attributed to the differences in the food source.
snip
Owned by Monsanto, the GE maize variety tested in this study is tolerant to a herbicide and resistant to certain insect pests. It has been approved for planting and food use in a variety of countries, including the US, Argentina, Japan, Philippines and South Africa. In Mexico and the European Union(1), it is approved for food and feed use.
"This study is yet another example that the food and feed safety of GE crops and food cannot be guaranteed. The reproductive toxicity of this GE maize was a totally unexpected result, but regulators around the world had considered this GE maize variety as safe as non-GE varieties - a potentially devastating error," said Dr. van Aken.How many studies will have to be performed to get GM ingredients listed on labels in... more
This once again illustrates the hold corporate money has on universities. Shameful.
__________
On our April 9 episode, Deconstructing Dinner examined the precarious state of the University of Guelph's organic agriculture program. As was learned, the University had chosen to cut the program along with others displaying low enrollment. The program now sits in limbo. The episode explored the key decision makers at the University in an effort to determine why the lion's share of research funding at the school is directed towards the genetic engineering of lifeforms and the corporate control of seeds instead of towards organic research. As a coordinator of the organic agriculture major, Dr. E. Ann Clark's work within the Department of Plant Agriculture has provided her with an ideal vantage point from which to critically analyze the outcomes of the genetic engineering of the food supply also underway at the university.
On May 10, Deconstructing Dinner recorded Ann speak at an event hosted by the Kootenay Local Agricultural Society. Ann's talk dealt with the topic of genetically engineered food, and she sought to demonstrate the "spectacular failures" of these technologies, which are now pervasive throughout the North American food supply.
Topics Covered on the Show:
The May 14, 2009 joint statement from wheat producers supporting commercialization of GM wheat
The questionable groups communicating to Canadian wheat farmers
The formalization of Dow's NAFTA challenge against the Canadian Government
Challenging the genetically engineered promises of "higher yields", "reduced biocide use", "feeding the world", "saving the soil", "farmers would make more money"
Misleading promises of Bt Corn
Seemingly manipulated research findings of consumer preferernces of GM vs. conventional corn
The disinformation communicated by Canada's largest agricultural publication, The Western Producer.
You can listen to this show at the upload link on the site linked here.
end of excerptThis once again illustrates the hold corporate money has on universities. Shameful.... more
On Nov. 11, Austria's Ministries for Agriculture and Health released the results of a long-term study [PDF] of genetically modified organisms. A widely used strain of GM corn, they found, appears to decrease both birthrates and the size of offspring in mice -- and the problems seem to grow with each generation.
This is a troubling conclusion. U.S. farmers planted the first commercial GMO crops in 1996. Today, upwards of 90 percent of U.S. soy, and 60 percent of U.S. corn, come from GMO seeds. Those crops suffuse our food supply -- they provide the bulk of our cooking oil and sweetener, and feed the animals that feed us. By 2003, as much as 75 percent of processed food available in the United States contained GMO ingredients, according to an estimate cited by the USDA. GM corn and soy acreage have only expanded since then.
Of course, the reproductive function is complex and intimately linked to the body's other systems. If GMOs are affecting our ability to reproduce, then it seems likely they're affecting our health in other ways, too.
Yet the Austrian study dropped with a thud in the U.S. media. The New York Times didn't mention it; on The Washington Post website, it rated a few paragraphs in the midst of a daily health round up.
Nor did it seem to penetrate the world of our president-elect. Less than two weeks after the Austrian study emerged, Obama named the members of his transition team for issues related to the USDA. Among them was Michael R. Taylor, a consultant who has spent the past 30 years bouncing among high-level positions at the USDA, the FDA, and Monsanto, the company that dominates the lucrative market for GMO seeds. Taylor served as director of policy at the FDA during the 1990s, when GMOs began to infiltrate the food supply.
A few days before that, Des Moines Register agriculture correspondent Philip Brasher speculated that Obama will be as friendly to the ag-biotech industry as his predecessor, based on "both [Obama's] statements of policy and the type of people from whom he's taking advice."
Given the startling conclusions of the Austrian researchers and Obama's evident embrace of GMOs, it's time to revisit how the U.S. government regulates the technology.
More at the linkOn Nov. 11, Austria's Ministries for Agriculture and Health released the results... more
I wonder, did Tom Vilsack of this Dept. Of Agriculture meet with their agriculture secretary?Monsanto is licking its chops to get into Mexico because they are being frozen out of Europe. Don't wonder now why Obama won't bother reworking NAFTA. This is one reason why. The only good thing about this is that individual Mexican states can still ban it, and based on the rightful opposition to it and its threat to the biodiversity of the corn varieties there I hope that happens.
_____
From the article:
NOTE: For what's really happening in Mexico, see the video of the interview with Silvia Ribeiro
*Agriculture secretary says genetically-modified varieties of this ubiquitous crop may be used in experiments.
Mexico has revised its biosafety law to reverse a nationwide ban on genetically-modified corn, the country's most important crop and the centerpiece of the Mexican diet, and allow the varieties to be used in experiments.
In a press conference, Environment and Natural Resources Secretary Juan Rafael Elvira Quesada, said that the government would fight any illicit planting of genetically-modified corn, of which Mexico is the birthplace.
Elvira Quesada added that the changes to Biosafety and Genetically-Modified Organisms would not prohibit individual states from instating bans on transgenic corn, and under those circumstances, experiments would not be an excuse.
Mexico's agriculture secretary said there are 25 requests to plant experimental transgenic corn in the country.
Genetically-modified corn has been a contentious issue in Mexico, where there are some 200 native varieties of the staple crop.
In February, a study by scientists from the Mexico, the Netherlands and the United States found that genetically-modified corn strains did contaminate native corn varieties in southern Mexico.
The study, led by Elena Alvarez-Buylla of the National Autonomous University in Mexico, backed findings a contentious 2001 study published in the journal Nature that said the genetically-engineered corn had been detected in some of these varieties, sparking a heated debate over the study´s research methods and findings.
On Feb. 25, Mexico City's government issued a declaration that seeks to protect native corn varieties and promote ecologically-friendly and organic agriculture.
The decision was lauded by Greenpeace Mexico as a sign of commitment to protecting "Mexicans' most important grain." - Latinamerica Press.I wonder, did Tom Vilsack of this Dept. Of Agriculture meet with their agriculture... more
Raise the alarm for Mexican corn-s biosecurity: a molecular study conducted by Mexican, American and Dutch researchers demonstrates the presence of genes from genetically modified organisms (GMO) among the varieties of traditional corn cultivated in the remote regions of Oaxaca State in the southern part of the country, even though the Mexican government has always maintained a moratorium on the use of transgenic seed.
The results of this study incite the experts to demand much more restrictive protective measures. Old time agriculture as practiced in Mexico - where wind-blown pollination of corn is the norm and where peasants are in the habit of exchanging their seed - seems to aggravate the risk of rapid GMO contamination.
An article that details their conclusions should be published in the next edition of the review, Molecular Ecology. It was written by Elena Alvarez-Buylla of the Institute for Ecology of the Autonomous National University of Mexico (UNAM), with the collaboration of a dozen other scientists.
Their work could relaunch the controversy that was unleashed in 2001 by a highly controversial article in the magazine, Nature, the authors of which, biologists David Quist and Ignacio Chapela from the University of California at Berkeley, revealed that criollos (traditional) corn from the Oaxaca region - one of the cradles of that cereal - were contaminated by Roundup Ready (RR) and Bt genes, property of the American company Monsanto.
In her book, The World According to Monsanto, (due for release in March 2009 and already available for pre-order at Amazon.com), Marie-Monique Robin related how Mr. Chapela became a victim of media lynching at that time at the instigation of the dominant company in the GMO market. Nature ended up publishing a disclaimer, deeming that the two biologists article was insufficiently backed up.
However, seven years later, the work Mrs. Alvarez-Buylla directed broadly confirms their conclusions, as a report published in the November 13 Nature emphasizes. The researchers have discovered transgenes in three of the twenty-three fields of Oaxaca-s northern sierra where samples were taken in 2001, then in two places sampled in 2004.
American Allison Snow, of the University of California and author in 2005 of a preliminary study that seemed to undermine Ignacio Chapela and David Quist-s discoveries (and which were then immediately exploited by GMO partisans), is publishing an additional complimentary note in the same issue of Molecular Ecology, in which she judges the molecular analysis conducted by the UNAM team to be very good, bringing to light the positive evidence of transgenes.
snip
The study-s authors call for a strengthening of biosecurity measures to preserve native corn varieties, especially in Mexico, corn-s center of origin. They say Mexico must set up truly independent laboratories and adapt criteria of molecular analysis to the Mexican reality, rather than trusting methods used in countries such as the United States which have an agricultural system entirely different from our own.
But their greatest concern at present involves planned pharmaceutical trusts which want to make a profit on corn biomass and use it as a bioreactor in order, for example, to express vaccines and anti-coagulants. Given the incidents that have already occurred in the United States where they have trouble separating bioreactors from GMO, we may fear that corn could turn into the garbage bin of the pharmaceutical industry, at the expense of its purpose as food, fears Mrs. Alvarez-Buylla. What shall we do when anti-coagulants arrive in Mexican tortilla?
* Quotes and apostrophes eliminated because they won-t show on post properly.Raise the alarm for Mexican corn-s biosecurity: a molecular study conducted by... more
And the list grows longer. Another win for our environment and health. Come on, really, how many of you would actually eat something named 'MON810?' That isn't real corn!
Thank you, GermanyAnd the list grows longer. Another win for our environment and health. Come on,... more
This is an incredible story of intimidation, deception, and corporate espionage, and that description is not going too far. The story at this link is long and involved, but I ask you to read it from beginning to end. It describes the lengths Monsanto and their minions went to in order to silence the author of a study that showed that GM DNA was infecting the traditional corn vareties of Mexico and that the DNA was not even stable. We wonder where viruses like Swine flu originate. I am beginning to wonder if viruses are spread by the GM BT transgenic corn DNA blowing in the wind.
Also, in this article you will read about the deceptive and destructive PR Internet campaign Monsanto is waging in order to discredit those who criticize GMOS. If you were not convinced that GMOs are harmful to our environment and that their release into our environment was for profit alone and perhaps even criminal, this may change yoru mind. This needs to be seen and people need to know that in no uncertain terms GMOs must be pulled from our shelves.This is an incredible story of intimidation, deception, and corporate espionage, and... more
Germany is safe! Now courts in every country where their BT corn that has contaminated our food and environment is grown should ban the growing of BT corn everywhere. Nice to see there is at least one court in this world that doesn't bend to intimidation.
Danke shoen!Germany is safe! Now courts in every country where their BT corn that has contaminated... more
We are on the tip of the iceberg regarding GMOs in our food supply. They have only been in our food supply for a little over a decade. We may not truly begin to see the full health effects of them for another twenty years. However, they are continued to be allowed to be spread thoughout the world to kill biodiversity and threaten traditional agriculture as we know it with little to no oversight. And Monsanto like coal, oil, and tobacco companies is paying big bucks to try to make people believe they do not need any independent testing of these test tube organisms they are passing off as food. As the end of this article states, Monsanto sure does have some explaining to do, only they do not give interviews. I wonder why?We are on the tip of the iceberg regarding GMOs in our food supply. They have only... more
Monsanto purchased a brazilian sugarcane ethanol company for 290 million dollars. Who the hell is that going to feed?
From the article:
At a time when many people were questioning causes of the recent food crisis, many more were investigating how our food systems can move forward to sustainably feed the increasing world population. Recently, the U.N. Task Force on Trade, Environment and Development released a report touting the noteworthy yields and economic benefits of organic agricu... in Africa. Even recognizing that organic production offers significant hope for increasing food security. Another report released earlier this year by the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Scien... noted that a "radical change" was needed for agriculture, and that agricultural biotechnology held little promise. But corporations like Monsanto took a different approach to the problem -- exploiting the food crisis as a means to sell more of their own biotech seeds.
Monsanto-s website is rife with articles discussing how its applications of biotechnology will supposedly solve the food crisis. Back in June, on the cusp of the World Food Summit, Monsanto announced plans to double crop-yields by 2030 with biotechnology. The New York Times covered the story including a quote from a soybean genetics expert at the University of Nebraska who stated, The hype-to-reality ratio of that one is essentially infinity ... seeing an exponential change in the yield curve is unlikely. But while experts were doubting Monsanto-s claims, a Business Week article quoted Hugh Grant, the head of Monsanto, saying, That isn-t a feel-good thing ... Satisfying the demand curve is a great business opportunity. Grant may consider that quote a gaffe, but it was a telling sign regarding where Monsanto-s true interests lie: not with people, but with profits.
Last week Monsanto purchased Aly Participacoes Ltda, a Brazilian company involved in sugarcane breeding and sugarcane ethanol. Monsanto-s press release noted, Global demands for raw sugar and biofuels are beginning to rise at a faster pace than the current production levels in sugarcane, a crop that is essential to meeting these demands, said Carl Casale, executive vice president of global strategy and operations for Monsanto.
Last time I checked, hungry people can-t eat ethanol and probably can-t afford sugar. So why, in the middle of a food crisis, is Monsanto investing in sugarcane ethanol?Monsanto purchased a brazilian sugarcane ethanol company for 290 million dollars. Who... more
Some people might ask why I continue to talk about this. Well, that is because biodiversity to me is the linchpin to our survival as a species. Without it and with GMO monocrops deciding our food source it is highly likely in my view that we will face a worldwide famine in the future because of this transgenic contamination that is killing biodiversity. And I believe Mexico is just the tip of the iceberg.
So many thousands of varieties of rice, corn and other crops have been killed off due to industrial agriculture and losing sight of what agriculture is all about. Agriculture is now another facet of our lives that has been privitized and industrialized to the point where farmers no longer even have to put their hands into the Earth to plant it. There is no closeness in the relationship between Mother Earth and the planting of the seeds that are the miracle of life combined with water the elixir of life. It is now being made into a cold, greed driven, downright scary business where yields are not gotten to feed hungry people, but to be used as a commodity to feed animals for slaughter, make biofuels, pay off debt, and take up land that could be used more productively.
And now, even this contamination is being hidden from the people en masse as well as research being thwarted on these GMOs to give us the truth of their longterm effects on our health and our environment. Just what kind of world are we making for future generations? Where is the truth they will seek when they don't get it from us?
Agriculture in many countries is not just the action of planting seeds in the ground to make a profit off a government subsidy to support a corporation's profit sheets. It is a sacred tradition that shows the spiritual relationship we have to the only planet that can sustain our needs. It is a labor of love conducted by the first stewards of our global environment so many centuries ago that has survived, but is now slowly being stolen from us.
To see that relationship being totally destroyed saddens and outrages me. To look at the future in a world run by a handful of multinationals whose only tradition is to not lose one dollar of business at any cost as we continue to fall further and further away from the closeness we once has to this Earth also explains to me why we have no peace. And I think that's worth talking about. We have great power within us to preserve that which has been handed down for centuries that has worked in continuing the natural processes that have sustained us. To use that power to destroy that which sustains us is in my view to doom us to an certain future we cannot afford to risk.Some people might ask why I continue to talk about this. Well, that is because... more
The grand scheme to introduce genetically modified foods into Kenya seemed to shift into top gear after the Ministry of Agriculture launched a campaign last month to make the country appreciate them.
First, Minister for Agriculture, William Ruto, who has on several occasions publicly expressed his support for the introduction of GM foods into the country, launched the National Biotechnology Awareness Strategy last month.
According to a statement Ruto sent to the press, the strategy was aimed at offering Kenyans "accurate and reliable information and knowledge" about such branches of biotechnology as tissue culture, molecular breeding and genetic modification.
"This will enable Kenyans to make informed decisions and be involved in determining the pace of adoption of biotechnology in the country," he said.
However, Ruto went ahead to state that Kenya will embrace GMOs, making it appear the government had launched the awareness campaign merely to state its pro-GMO stance.
This has led to fresh fears that the government has irrevocably decided on introduction, cultivation and commercialisation of GMOs in the country.
snip
The Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology has also been preparing to take back to parliament a Bill that was heavily criticised last year for failing to address the concerns of farmers and consumers and for merely seeking to create the necessary legal framework for the introduction of GMOs in Kenya.
snip
"They want to do it by force, the so-called national awareness strategy is a mere gimmick," said Josphat Ngonyo of the Africa Network for Animal Welfare. Mr Ngonyo said KBioC, of which he is a member, has attempted to get the agriculture minister to listen to its side of the GMO story to no avail. KBioC is anumbrella body representing over 50 farmers' groups, religious organisations, consumer organisations and NGOs.
snip
But one of the leading proponents of genetic engineering in Kenya, Dr Florence Wambugu, told The EastAfrican that those opposed to the introduction and proliferation of GMOs in Africa are profiteers and fearmongers.
"There are those who get business from fearmongering," she said. She also accused Greenpeace International of offering false information by claiming that some of the maize seeds grown in Kenya are contaminated by GM-materials.
This drew the ire of a Greenpeace official who accused Dr Wambugu of employing "scare tactics" in campaigning for GMOs in Africa.
"The genetic engineering industry, and their spokesperson for Africa, Florence Wambugu, must be really desperate if they are now resorting to lies, and ridiculous ones... Greenpeace never ever endangered the environment, the life of farmers and the health of consumers by putting a single genetically engineered seed into any soil anywhere in the world, and whoever suggests the opposite is completely out of touch with reality," said Jan Van Aken of Greenpeace's Sustainable Agriculture.
What is interesting is that even though she denied that Monsanto ever funded her in her pro-GMO campaign, Dr Wambugu nevertheless admitted that she gets money from such bodies as the United States Development Agency (USAid), Rockefeller Foundation, Dupont and CropLife International.
The latter is an organisation represented in 91 countries whose members include the global who's-who of the genetic engineering industry -- BASF, Bayer CropScience, Dow Agrosciences, Dupont, FMC, Monsanto, Sumitomo and Syngenta. Dr Wambugu is the founder of Africa Harvest, which campaigns for GMOs in Africa.
_________________ The grand scheme to introduce genetically modified foods into Kenya seemed to shift... more
Don't tell me there is no difference between traditional corn and BT corn. Even chickens can sense the difference! When will humans become as smart about this and stand up to the companies pushing this down our throats?
Excerpt:
Chickens refusing to eat the maize they had been fed has led to the discovery that their feed had been genetically modified to include a well-known weed and insect killer.
Strilli Oppenheimer was recently approached by Dawid Klopper, the head gardener at the family estate, Brenthurst, informing her that her indigenous African chickens were refusing to eat the mealies in the chicken feed bought from a large supplier. Concerned that the birds may be ingesting genetically modified maize, she instructed Klopper to have the maize tested.
The chickens' diet was immediately changed to include organic vegetables, Oppenheimer stopped consuming the home-grown eggs and the maize was sent to the GMO testing facility at the University of the Free State for analysis.
The results confirmed Oppenheimer's initial suspicion - the maize had been genetically engineered to produce proteins that are toxic to certain insects and weeds.
"It contained BT1 which makes the maize insect resistant, as well as Roundup which makes it weed resistant. This is the first report we have had of chickens not eating GM feed," said a GM expert.
While small quantities of BT1 and Roundup weed killer were found in the seeds, the concern remained with the cumulative effect of GM feed, not only on the chickens, but also on the eggs they produced for the family.
"This is of serious concern. Do you know that 96 percent of soya-based foods are genetically modified and that maize in South Africa is contaminated," asked Oppenheimer, pointing out that research by well-known scientist Dr Arpad Pusztai had shown that rats fed on GM potatoes suffered from a weakened immune system and stunted growth of their internal organs, including the liver, kidneys and brain.
Pusztai was fired by the Rowett Research Institute in the UK in 1998 after his research into the human nutritional consequences of GM. His findings had far-reaching implications for the biotech industry, which had contended that GM crops and products would not adversely affect human health.
International research has shown a direct link between certain types of genetic engineering and cancer.
Gundula Azeez and Coilin Nunan of The Soil Association, a UK environmental charity, stated in their paper, "GM Crops - the health effects", that international research had shown that milk, eggs and meat from GM-fed animals contained GM crop DNA, concluding that it was likely that people were frequently being exposed to GM DNA.
They concluded that because of the lapses in extensive safety assessments, there were "very good scientific reasons for being concerned about the safety of GM crops".Don't tell me there is no difference between traditional corn and BT corn. Even... more
Thanks to the GMWatch translators for this http://web.archive.org/web/20071225180614rn_1/www.gmwatch...
--- ---
In 2008, media reports showcased the various impacts of environmental contamination on bees and beekeepers: in the Germany's Baden-Württemberg state, 500 million bees died in Spring due to the insecticidal seed treatment agent clothianidin. Another example is the case of a Swabian beekeeper, who destroyed his whole honey harvest because it contained pollen of the GM corn MON810, after the administrative court declared the honey as 'non marketable'. The judgement is not yet absolute.
In its January edition, the German eco- magazine Öko-Test published an article on the analysis of 24 honeys, including 6 canola honeys, for GM and pesticide contamination, as well as other quality criteria.
Only 3 products were rated "very good" while six either got an "inadequate" rating or "failed". A whopping eleven samples (almost half of the samples) - mainly from South America - were contaminated with GM pollen, predominantly of GM Roundup Ready soy. Although the oil plant supplies little nectar and therefore is not a honey plant, the bees apparently still take the pollen. Latin American countries - where aplenty GM soy is grown - are at the same time suppliers of a bigger part of the world honey production.
At least, honey from German beekeepers as well as those from Southeastern Europe and fair trade honey were unpolluted. For the latter, the reason might be that small-scale beekeepers often produce their honey in less contaminated regions than big apiaries. Among the canola honeys, the lab found GM in the Canadian Canola-Clover Honey - unsurprisingly, as Canada mostly grows GM canola.
Pesticides appeared virtually exclusively in German products, mostly the insecticide thiacloprid - found in honeys with a high proportion of canola. Unfortunately, even the supposedly organic canola honey by Allos contained increased residues.
Reacting to the test results, the company Breitsamer wrote that beekeepers are victims of genetic engineering; they themselves are not using GM, do not grow GM crops, and do not have any interest in herbicide resistant crops. Furthermore, the bees could not be controlled as they search for nectar within an area of 50 square kilometre. By way of contrast, the discounter Lidl commented that the entry of GM soy pollen is completely accidental, and could vary widely within one charge; moreover, the quantities are very small.
The article concludes that while nobody wants GM in their honey, the findings show that coexistence of conventional and GM agriculture is impossible. Therefore, the ratings reflect a political reality rather than being due to lack of due diligence by the honey producers. Furthermore, the legal position does not support the honey as the GM pollen are not GMOs as such - the legislation explicitly deals with GMOs. Thus, the GM content in honey neither has to be approved nor labelled. On the other hand, judgements such as the one from the administrative court regarding the GM maize MON810 show that there are other legal conceptions. The background: at present MON810 is not clearly approved for human consumption.
Sometimes the level of 0.9 percent is used - as honey only contains only around 0.1 to 0.5 percent pollen, labelling then would not be compulsory. In any case, transparency for the consumer falls by the wayside.NOTE: A German magazine has had honey tested and found extensive GM contamination.... more
