tagged w/ scientific testing
-
Monsanto's herbicide Roundup used on genetically manipulated (GM) Roundup Ready crops is linked to human cell death, birth defects, cancer and miscarriages, says a report released at the European Parliament by an international group of scientists.
The report comes at a crucial time for Australia, where a popular infant soy formula has tested positive to unlabelled GM soy and corn, and Roundup Ready canola and cotton are grown.
The report, “GM Soy: Sustainable? Responsible?”, highlights new research by Argentine government scientist Professor Andrés Carrasco and an international coalition of scientists. They found serious health impacts from Roundup’s active ingredient, glyphosate, other chemicals in the formulated herbicide and its breakdown products. The report also provides a global overview of scientific papers and other documents on the impacts of GM soy production. The new research is published in the American Chemical Society journal ‘Chemical Research in Toxicology’.
GM Roundup Ready (RR) soy is now more than 90% of soy grown in North American and Argentina, and is also widely spread in Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Bolivia. Monsanto's own data shows Roundup herbicide sales have skyrocketed since GM RR crops were first planted in the USA in 1996[i]. The amount of toxic herbicide now used on soy has public health implications.
At the European Parliament in Brussels where the report was presented[ii], Prof Carrasco said childhood cancer had increased by 300% and babies with birth defects by 400% during the past decade in parts of Argentina. GM RR soy is grown there to supply European and Australian farmers with cheap GM animal feed: "I suspect the toxicity classification of glyphosate is too low… in some cases this can be a powerful poison," he said.
The report also refers to studies that found: the uterus and ovaries of female rats fed GM RR soy showed changes; rabbits' kidney and heart enzyme functions were disturbed. An intergenerational study of hamsters fed GM soy found slower growth rates and higher mortality among pups, and widespread infertility in the third generation[iii].
Bob Phelps, Executive Director of GM-free Australian advocacy group Gene Ethics, says the Australian response to genetically manipulated ingredients in baby formula is grossly inadequate.
"Every test for GM contamination of S-26 formula has been positive for GM contamination. Yet our food regulator FSANZ refuses to mandate a recall, while Coles and Woolworths refuse to remove S-26 from their shelves.
"This routine contamination requires GM labelling under the law. If FSANZ won't act on this false and misleading failure to label GM ingredients, then the ACCC should intervene," he says.
"The Gillard Government must support independent Senator Nick Xenophon and Greens Senator Rachel Siewert who both want to fix up our food labelling laws. Labels must enable parents to choose baby formulas that that are not GM polluted. We call for the Government to ensure the assessment criteria of all novel foods, including GM, are amended and to remove the loopholes in Standard 1.5 that exempt most GM and other novel food products from any requirement to be labelled as such," he concludes.Monsanto's herbicide Roundup used on genetically manipulated (GM) Roundup Ready... more
-
-
p?aid=676
At its fourth meeting in 2008, Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety established an Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group (AHTEG) on Risk Assessment and Risk Management. The AHTEG is considering, among other things, the framework to identify GMOs or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, including risks to human health.
Governments and relevant organizations were invited to submit scientifically sound information on the types of GMOs or traits that may have adverse effects on biological diversity and human health that would be compiled and included in a synthesis report for consideration by the AHTEG and Parties.
In its submission, Norway highlighted information from scientific studies which raise "early warning" signs on the effects of GMOs on biological environments and on human health.
It noted that GMOs harbouring Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) Cry endotoxins may cause unintended direct adverse effects on biological diversity including but not limited to insects, aquatic life, soil microbes, and their food web dynamics, as well as on the sustainable use of biological diversity related to crop plants and their progenitors important for sustainable agricultural production and food security. Similar caution was expressed towards GMOs with genes that confer herbicide tolerance as well as GM plants with tolerance to abiotic stresses such as tolerance to drought and cold and GMOs with stacked events.
In addition, Norway recommended caution with regard to GM fish with traits such as cold tolerance, increased growth rate or high tolerance to environmental pollutants. It also noted that GM trees with long life-spans would be a challenge for risk assessment. Norway also expressed caution with regard to GM viruses with altered traits and host specificity and was concerned about GM pharmplants entering the food chain.
Given the broad uncertainties surrounding the current scientific knowledge on the impacts of novel organisms into complex environments, Norway called for the adoption of the precautionary approach as well as for further studies, especially long term studies, to be conducted.p?aid=676
At its fourth meeting in 2008, Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on... more
-
-
Scientists have proved that Genetically Modified Organisms are harmful for mammals. The researchers discovered that animals that eat GM foodstuffs lose their ability to reproduce. Campbell hamsters that have a fast reproduction rate were fed for two years with ordinary soya beans, which are widely used in agriculture and those contain different percentages of GM organisms. Another group of hamsters, the control group, was fed with pure soya, which was found with great difficulty in Serbia because 95 percent of soya in the world is transgenic.
Concerning the experiment carried out jointly by the National Association for Gene Security and the Institute of Ecological and Evolutional Problems, Dr. Alexei Surov has this to say. "We selected several groups of hamsters, kept them in pairs in cells and gave them ordinary food as always," says Alexei Surov. "We did not add anything for one group but the other was fed with soya that contained no GM components, while the third group with some content of Genetically Modified Organisms and the fourth one with increased amount of GMO. We monitored their behavior and how they gain weight and when they give birth to their cubs. Originally, everything went smoothly. However, we noticed quite a serious effect when we selected new pairs from their cubs and continued to feed them as before. These pairs' growth rate was slower and reached their sexual maturity slowly. When we got some of their cubs we formed the new pairs of the third generation. We failed to get cubs from these pairs, which
were fed with GM foodstuffs. It was proved that these pairs lost their ability to give birth to their cubs," Dr. Alexei Surov said.
Another surprise was discovered by scientists in hamsters of the third generation. Hair grew in the mouth of the animals that took part in the experiment. It's unclear why this happened. The researchers cannot understand why a programme of destruction is launched when animals take GMO foodstuffs. They say that this can be neutralized only by stopping to eat these foods. Consequently, scientists suggest imposing a ban on the use of GM foods until they are tested for their bio-security.
The results of Russian scientists coincide with those of their colleagues from France and Austria. For one, when scientist proved that GM maize was harmful for mammals, France banned immediately its production and sale. The scientists who carried out the experiment say that it's too early to make far-reaching conclusions about the health hazards of the GMO. They insist that there is a need to carry out comprehensive research. They suggest implementing the project, "Safety Gene Technology" at the innovation centre, "Skolkovo" which is being set up near Moscow.Scientists have proved that Genetically Modified Organisms are harmful for mammals.... more
-
-
The Monsanto RoundUp has been a feature of the Sustainable Agriculture Group where I bring you reports regarding news in the world of GMOs and Monsanto. I haven't done one in a while so I thought I would do this to bring people on Current up to speed on the most important events in the past month. It would take too long to bring you all of the news in the world of GMOs within the past five months, but suffice it to say it has been a busy world with both ups and downs.
Hopefully, through our actions and by dessiminating this information to as many people as we can we can bring about the tipping point that will bring back and give food sovereignty to people worldwide who are seeing it stolen and jeopardized by a stealth attack on their seeds, their biodiversity, their culture, their land, and their very livelihoods.
Check below for postings as reference to all mentioned in this video, and thank you for supporting this endeavor of the Sustainable Agriculture Group.
http://current.com/groups/sustainable-agriculture/
Knowledge is power. Satyagraha!
JanThe Monsanto RoundUp has been a feature of the Sustainable Agriculture Group where I... more
-
-
1947: John Bardeen and Walter Brattain, with support from colleague William Shockley, demonstrate the transistor at Bell Laboratories in Murray Hill, New Jersey.
It’s been called the most important invention of the 20th century. The transistor, aka point-contact transistor, is a semiconductor device that can amplify or switch electrical signals. It was developed to replace vacuum tubes.
Vacuum tubes were bulky, unreliable and consumed too much power. So AT&T’s research-and-development arm, Bell Labs, started a project to find an alternative.
For nearly a decade before the first transistor was developed, Shockley, a physicist at Bell Labs, worked on the theory of such a device. But Shockley couldn’t build a working model. His first semiconductor amplifier had a “small cylinder coated thinly with silicon, mounted close to a small, metal plate.”
So Shockley asked his colleagues, Bardeen and Brattain, to step in. One of the problems they noticed with Shockley’s first attempt was condensation on the silicon. So they submerged it in water and suggested the initial prototype have a metal point “that would be pushed into the silicon surrounded by distilled water.” At last there was amplification — but disappointingly, at a trivial level.
Following more experiments, germanium replaced silicon, which increased amplification by about 300 times.
A few more modifications later, Brattain had a gold metal point extended into the germanium. That resulted in better ability to modulate amplification at all frequencies.
The final design of a point-contact transistor had two gold contacts lightly touching a germanium crystal that was on a metal plate connected to a voltage source. Also known as the “little plastic triangle,” it became the first working solid-state amplifier.
Bardeen and Brattain demonstrated the transistor device to Bell Lab officials Dec. 23, 1947. Shockley was reported to have called it “a magnificent Christmas present.” But Shockley himself was not present when it happened and was said to be bitter over losing out on that day.
He had his revenge, though. Shockley continued to work on the idea and refine it. In early 1948, he came up with the bipolar or junction transistor, a superior device that took over from the point-contact type.
Bell Labs publicly announced the first transistor at a press conference in New York on June 30, 1948.
The transistor went to replace bulky vacuum tubes and mechanical relays. The invention revolutionized the world of electronics and became the basic building block upon which all modern computer technology rests.
Shockley, Bardeen and Brattain shared the 1956 Nobel Prize in Physics for the transistor, but the trio never worked together after the first few months of their initial creation of the transistor.
Shockley left Bell Labs and founded Shockley Semiconductor in Mountain View, California — one of the early high-tech companies in what would later become Silicon Valley.
Brattain remained a fellow at Bell Labs. Bardeen became a professor at the University of Illinois in 1951, and he shared a second Nobel Prize in Physics in 1972, for the first successful explanation of superconductivity.
http://www.wired.com/thisdayintech/2009/12/1223Shockley-Bardeen-Brattain-transistor1947: John Bardeen and Walter Brattain, with support from colleague William Shockley,... more
-
-
The active ingredient in many insect repellents, deet, has been found to be toxic to the central nervous system. Researchers say that more investigations are urgently needed to confirm or dismiss any potential neurotoxicity to humans, especially when deet-based repellents are used in combination with other neurotoxic insecticides.
Vincent Corbel from the Institut de Recherche pour le Développement in Montpellier, and Bruno Lapied from the University of Angers, France, led a team of researchers who investigated the mode of action and toxicity of deet (N,N-Diethyl-3-methylbenzamide). Corbel said, "We've found that deet is not simply a behavior-modifying chemical but also inhibits the activity of a key central nervous system enzyme, acetycholinesterase, in both insects and mammals".
snip
These insecticides are often used in combination with deet, and the researchers also found that deet interacts with carbamate insecticides to increase their toxicity. Corbel concludes, "These findings question the safety of deet, particularly in combination with other chemicals, and they highlight the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to the development of safer insect repellents for use in public health".
Link to study:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/imedia/5277085962613386_article.pdf?random=455930The active ingredient in many insect repellents, deet, has been found to be toxic to... more
-
-
But will this be on any television network today? Will any of the American people who need to know the potential dangers that GMOs pose to their environment and health be given that information by our media? Our politicans? This article makes a good analogy in regards to where we stand on GMOs now and where we stood regarding climate change before the dam on the silence about it was broken. As is noted in this article, Al Gore with Earth In The Balance tried to warn us but only to have it fall on deaf ears.
Now many are out here once again trying to warn people of another environmental/ health threat that has stealthily crept into their supermarkets, homes, and bodies, put there by the same moneyed corporate interests with political ties and profit motives that supercede morals, principles, or scientific integrity.
As with the climate crisis now as well the same question begs to be answered regarding GMOs: Will the truth about their effects and how they were released into our environment without our consent be made known and seen too late? Will humans who "trust" government in order to not have to worry about anything that deters them from their own distractions simply allow the destruction of biodiversity? Have we truly become that apathetic about our own lives?But will this be on any television network today? Will any of the American people who... more
-
-
Another test, and other findings against GM corn. And yet, even though the majority of our processed foods in America are made with this 'stuff', our government doesn't deem it necessary for the people to know what is going into their food and give them the choice of whether or not they wish to consume it. Seems to me if there is nothing unnatural or unsafe about it labelling would not be a problem. This is very disturbing and it is important that people who are eating this 'stuff' be informed of these tests, especially since they have no choice in consuming it. Hopefully in the coming year that will change, because those of us who care about the health of our children (child obesity is rising) and others, and the sustainability of the environment these organisms have just been let out into without proper testing will be relentless in fighting for our Democratic right to know what we are consuming in our food!
And just as an addendum:
I got a message from someone after the posting I made yesterday regarding tests that showed bee behavioral anomolies after being exposed to proteins from BT corn. I was called an 'alarmist' and basicially made to feel a bit intimidated about posting the information. To you I say, here is another bit of proof for you. If you have done your own testing and come to a different conclusion post the results here for all to see. Oh, and tests done by Monsanto do not count. And as far as my posting this information when I come upon it...that will continue, because something this important to our planet's sustainability, biodiversity, and the health and safety of our children and people is not something I intend to ignore.
Thank you.Another test, and other findings against GM corn. And yet, even though the majority of... more
-
-
The above paragraphs summarize published data that clearly show the following:
(1) Compounds structurally related to a common small molecule can have a lethal effect when present as even a minor contaminant in a food supplement.
(2) The GM enhancement of a metabolic pathway by the overexpression of genes for that pathway can have unpredictable consequences in the form of synthesizing a toxin.
(3) Finally, in the case of golden rice, it is argued that biologically active compounds derived from aberrant plant carotenoid synthesis could have profound effects on human development.
Similar arguments can be made for NEP-derived fatty acids that are directly incorporated into brain lipids and about NEPs overproducing vitamin E. Aberrant fatty acid composition of brain lipids is implicated in Alzheimer’s disease,45,46 and vitamin E has a role similar to RA in mammalian development.47 The excess consumption of a nutrient can also have negative effects. For example, a clinical trial with vitamin E supplementation showed that a relatively small dose increased the risk of heart failure,48 and smokers who supplemented their diet with -carotene had an increased risk of lung cancer.49 Therefore, there is a potential for nutrient toxicity in NEPs because upper tolerable levels of many nutrients are not well established (p. 107)35 and are likely to vary between individuals and lifestyles.
The information presented here shows that not only the potential harm of the product should be considered for risk assessment, but the GM process itself. The data clearly invalidate the argument that "the regulatory trigger for risk assessment should be based upon the physical features of the product rather than the process by which the product was generated."50 While it is true that traditional breeding methods can give rise to potentially hazardous products, the most recent assessment of GM food safety by the National Research Council35 stated that GM “has a higher probability of producing unanticipated changes than some genetic modification methods" (p. 118), but it curiously concludes by stating that the risk of GM technology is no greater than conventional breeding methods.
There are, in fact, no data comparing the food safety profiles of GM versus conventional breeding, and the ubiquitous argument that since there is no evidence that GM products make people sick, they are safe (see, for example, McHughen and Smyth,50 Bradford et al.,51 and Miller et al.52) is both illogical and false. There are, again, simply no data or even valid assays to support this contention.53 Without proper epidemiological studies, most types of harm will not be detected, and no such studies have been conducted.
The necessity of labeling all GM products and particularly NEPs is therefore critical if there is any hope of monitoring adverse health consequences due to their consumption. For example, it would have been impossible to identify the source of the toxic tryptophan supplement if the product were not traceable through labeling. It follows that before NEPs producing biologically active molecules such as -carotene, omega-3 fatty acids, or vitamin E are introduced into the food chain, great care must be taken to do rigorous, multigenerational animal safety assessments with the hope of identifying risks to health (for methods, see, for example, the 2007 publication by the National Toxicology Program54 and Pusztai and Bardocz55). In addition, the products must be labeled and traceable, and the unpredictable and unintended metabolic changes that may occur in NEPs require the thorough testing of the entire edible portion of the plant, not just the designated product as is almost always done by biotech companies...
David R. Schubert
Cellular Neurobiology Laboratory, The Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, California
JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL FOOD
J Med Food 11 (4) 2008, 000–000
The above paragraphs summarize published data that clearly show the following:
(1)... more
-
