Natural Solutions Foundation
The Voice of Global Food and Health Freedom™
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
Permalink: http://drrimatruthreports.com/?p=6871
BAN ALL GMOs NOW! http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=2049
FACT: Genetically Modified Plants and animals (GMOs) contain foreign DNA whose impact is not subject to safety evaluation by the FDA or any other government agency
FACT: GMOs contain genetic markers which confer antibiotic resistance to the GMO AND to the environment, helping to create the new plague, antibiotic resistant “super bugs” in animals, humans and the environment
FACT: The FDA, supposedly our health watchdog for foods and drugs, regularly bases its approvals not on scientific data, but on personal conflicts of interest which are permitted under current rules.
FACT: The FDA is not permitted to examine safety data after initial, company-generated preliminary indication that a GMO is safe
FACT: Acknowledging consumer revulsion at the thought of eating GMOs, the FDA forbids labeling items, or ingredients, as GMO “to prevent consumers from making an error since FDA regards all GMOs as “substantially equivalent” to unmodified foods
FACT: There is no scientific basis for the concept of “substantially equivalent”
FACT: Every single independent scientific analysis of GMO impact on health, immune function, allergic status, fertility, organ function and status, reproductive impact or any other function shows that GMOs impair fertility, organ function, fetal and neonatal survival, immune function and a host of other parameters
FACT: GMO genetic material infects the DNA of other plants and animals, animals (including humans) who ingest it and the bacteria on which animals depend for life support both in their guts and in the rest of the biosphere
FACT: The US Department of Agriculture has stated that it does not know where, or what, more than 95% of the GMO field trials being conducted are.
FACT: Bayer Crop Sciences, responsible for contamination of almost all rice fields in the US with GMO rice, has stated that it is not possible to contain GMO DNA from invading other fields and organisms.
FACT: GMO genes dominate natural ones and insert themselves into native DNA in wild and unpredictable ways so that novel proteins are produced whose impact is nearly totally unknown
FACT: Once GMOs contaminate native DNA, there is no known way to remove it
FACT: Virtually all GMO plants are modified to tolerate high levels of the toxic chemicals which their modifiers manufacture, increasing the use of these chemicals up to 400% and leading to super bugs and super weeds which are highly destructive to the environment and to crops
FACT: The same companies which modify foods and other organisms and make the chemicals they have been made resistant to also make drugs to treat the diseases that follow from them
FACT: GMO-related agrochemicals (such as very high doses of BT from BT corn) contaminate the ecosystem months to years after the crop has been harvested
Even politicians, generally some of the most obtuse and self-interested people on the planet, had a belly full of GMOs today. Democrats in the House and the Senate both urged the FDA to reject their approval of genetically modified salmon, hatched in the US and nurtured offshore. Even the members of the US Congress, generally so Big Biotech compliant, noted that the review process the FDA followed was flawed. What a “flawed process” means is that a dangerous drug (or, in this case, Frankenfood) would be put into the market. Only later would the dangers be noted and the product removed, in the case of a drug. But drugs are labeled while FDA-approved Frankenfood is never labeled. Thus, the cancer, infertility, loss of babies and other preventable tragedies it can cause will never be identified, allowing the contaminators to continue their deceptive campaign to convince us that, sick and dying as we are from our food, the US food supply is the safest in the world.
On the contrary, with every new DNA-modified food, our food supply becomes more deadly. Aunt Gertrude’s cancer? Was that from GMOs? How about the baby the Polly and Henry lost last year? The Lupus that has crippled Elizabeth? Who knows if they are unlabeled? And if they are permitted, in the face of evidence that they are dangerous, the question must be asked “WHY?”
The answer is both simple – “Greed”, and complex – “Genocide”
Take your pick. Protect us from greed, protect us from genocide. Either way, ban GMOs now and take back clean, unadulterated food while we still can.
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.Organics4U.org
www.ValleyoftheMoonCoffee.org
Dems in both chambers urge FDA to reject ‘Frankenfish’ salmon
By Mike Lillis – 09/29/10 09:31 AM ET
Calling the review process flawed, a long list of Democrats from both the House and Senate are calling on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to reject a Massachusetts company’s bid to bring a genetically modified salmon to the market.
The lawmakers say the FDA is evaluating the fish as if it were a new drug, not a new animal.
“The FDA approval process is inadequate and sets a dangerous precedent: the environmental review is flawed, and the consumer’s right to know is ignored,” a group of 20 House Democrats — led by Reps. Dennis Kucinich (Ohio), Peter DeFazio (Ore.) and Mike Thompson (Calif.) — wrote Tuesday to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg.
“Rather than developing an appropriate evaluation method, the FDA is currently proceeding to approve the [genetically engineered] fish using its process for reviewing a new drug meant for animals.”
A similar message is coming from the Senate, where 11 Democrats penned a separate letter to Hamburg Tuesday, arguing that information withheld from the public as proprietary prevents consumers from knowing fully the potential health effects of eating the product.
“Critical information has been kept from the public and consequently, only FDA and [the company] know important details about the approval process,” wrote the lawmakers, led by Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska).
The senators have asked Hamburg to “halt all proceedings” related to the approval process.
FDA officials met last week to decide whether AquaBounty Technologies’ should be permitted to sell its genetically modified Atlantic salmon, which has been outfitted with a growth hormone gene from a Chinook salmon and an antifreeze gene from an ocean pout. The genes allow the new creation — dubbed the AquAdvantage salmon — to grow about twice as fast as its natural cousin.
If approved, it would be the first genetically modified animal allowed to be sold as food.
The agency is also weighing whether to force the company to label its salmon as genetically engineered.
The Democrats endorsing the House letter include Reps. Earl Blumenauer (Ore.), George Miller (Calif.), Sam Farr (Calif.), John Garamendi (Calif.), Raúl Grijalva (Ariz.), Maurice Hinchey (N.Y.), Barbara Lee (Calif.), Betty McCollum (Minn.), Dennis Moore (Kan.), Jim Moran (Va.), Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.), Jackie Speier (Calif.), Peter Welch (Vt.), Lynn Woolsey (Calif.), David Wu (Ore.), Madeleine Bordallo (Guam) and Donna Christensen (V.I.).
Lawmakers signing the upper-chamber letter were Democratic Sens. Patty Murray (Wash.), Bernie Sanders (Vt.), Maria Cantwell (Wash.), Ron Wyden (Ore.), Patrick Leahy (Vt.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Barbara Mikulski (Md.), Jeff Merkley (Ore.), and Jon Tester (Mont.).
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) also endorsed the letter.
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/food-safety/121537-dems-in-both-chambers-urge-fda-to-reject-frankenfish-salmon
Think about it for a moment: unlabeled GMOs with medical consequences, including, as in this case, sterility, constitutes the force feeding of industrial toxins to a global population. You might call it forced drugging, and you would be right.
One would tend to assume that food sold to consumers would not have intended or unintended medical consequences like birth defects, cancer, auto immune diseases, infertility or sterility. One would be wrong. Since FDA and USDA do not conduct, or examine, safety studies except once very early on in the approval process when they review preliminary safety testing provided by the corporation developing the product (!), these “foods” (Frankenfoods, really) are launched into the market place with neither safety testing nor review of safety testing by our supposed “watchdog” agencies.
Natural Solutions Foundation believes in your health freedom. Apparently, the FDA and USDA do not. If they did, they would not permit dangerous, untested and unlabeled (that is, forbidden to be labeled!) GMO “food” to be sold in the US as “food” (for people) and “feed” (for animals who are, ultimately, eaten by people). You see, we believe that your right to safe, unadulterated foods and it also includes your right to have children if you want to, and grandchildren, too.
Seven months ago we noted that a little-known genetic bioengineering firm in California, Epicyte, announced the development of genetically engineered corn which contained a spermicide which made the semen of men who ate it sterile in 2001. At the time Epicyte had a joint venture agreement to spread its technology with DuPont and Syngenta, two of the sponsors of the Svalbard Doomsday Seed Vault. Epicyte was since acquired by a North Carolina biotech company. It was astonishing to learn that Epicyte had developed its spermicidal GMO corn with research funds from the US Department of Agriculture, the same USDA which, despite worldwide opposition, continued to finance the development of Terminator technology, now held by Monsanto.
Every independent scientific review of safety of which I am aware documents the serious, potentially lethal, and now, sterility-inducing impact of these “foods”. One has to wonder whether the Epicyte human sterility gene is part of the NK 603xMon810 genome now since its impact is sterility.
Whether it is or not, what is clear is that the consumption of the unlabeled “foods” or their by products and derivatives poses as great a threat to humanity as the ever-promised Avian Flu Pandemic. Eat them at your own risk. And get involved to pressure your Congressional members to become co-sponsors of, and strongly support, the 2 excellent bills before Congress now which would require safety testing and labeling of all GMO foods. Click here (http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/1128/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=25920) to send you strong message to Congress for your food rights.
Genetically Modified “foods” do not have names. They have numbers
Real food has names, usually less than 3 syllables. GMO “foods” and “feeds” hide behind initials and numbers like the biochemicals they are: e.g., NK 603 and Mon810. Those are genetically engineered corn types permitted for human and animal food in the US and the EU and elsewhere in the world. Neither corn (or “maize” as it is also called) has EVER been properly tested for safety by an independent governmental agency. No safety review of independent, non-industry studies has ever been done by a government agency anywhere in the world. Independent studies have never been commissioned by any government agency before these foods were approved, strictly on the basis of corporate assurances that these “foods” were safe in the US, Europe and elsewhere.
The reality is that when independent studies are conducted on these “foods”, they are neither safe nor benign.
The FDA thinks it is perfectly fine to take those rights, and your posterity, away from you without your knowledge or consent. By allowing genetically modified (GMO) “foods” which are known to reduce fertility in animals (we are, reproductively speaking, biologically similar to the animals being tested) and forbidding labeling of GMO foods or ingredients, the FDA says that foods like NK603 and Mon810 are acceptable to them. Is the truth that this is part of a long-stanidng, wide-ranging depopulation program using multiple ways to eliminate your ability to reproduce?
Who cares? You do, and so do we.
Thanks for your continuing support. Without it, the Natural Solutions Foundation could not continue its important work.
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
www.NaturalSolutionsFoundation.org
www.Organics4U.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMedia.tv
DONATE NOW http://drrimatruthreports.com/index.php?page_id=189 All deductions are tax deductible if you pay taxes in the US.
For donations in multiples of $25, we’ll say “Thanks†with a 1/2 lb bag of our full bodied Valley of the Moon(TM) Coffee: Shade Grown, GMO and Chemical Free Coffee from the Chiriqui Highlands of Panama, it’s Friendly Food Certified: Friendly to Your Health, Friendly to the Workers and Friendly to the Environment http://drrimatruthreports.com/?page_id=1130
Natural Solutions Foundation
Genetically-engineered food: potential threat to fertility
Study shows that genetically engineered maize affects reproductive health in mice
Vienna, Austria, 11 November 2008 – 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. Of course, that would mean changing the happy approval of Codex of all “foods” genetically modified and all GMO “feeds” as well. We’ll need your strong support to build the coalition to mass the muscle to reopen those issues. It can be done, of course, but we need your help.
Your only protection on your table and in your cupboards right now, of course, is to eat, grow and source organic food. Only organic food. Too expensive? What is your health worth and, if you are of child bearing age, the ability to have children or have your children have children? A few dollars more in food per week? Probably. If you can’t afford the expense, start doing intensive gardening in a corner of your apartment, on your patio or in a small corner of your garden. Foot Square Gardening references abound on the internet, at your library and in your book store. Take a look. Even in the winter it’s pretty simple to do indoors. Don’t delay, though. The damage from these Frankenfoods is cumulative.
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.
“GE food appears to be acting as a birth control agent, potentially leading to infertility – if this is not reason enough to close down the whole biotech industry once and for all, I am not sure what kind of disaster we are waiting for,†said Dr. Jan van Aken, GE expert at Greenpeace International. “Playing genetic roulette with our food crops is like playing Russian roulette with consumers and public healthâ€.
The Austrian scientists performed several long-term feeding trials with laboratory mice over a course of 20 weeks. One of the studies was a so-called reproductive assessment by continuous breeding (RACB) trial, in which the same parent generation gave birth to several litters of baby mice. The parents were fed either with a diet containing 33% of a GE maize variety (NK 603 x MON 810), or a closely related non-GE variety. A decrease in litter size and weight was found to be statistically significant in the third and fourth litters in the GE-fed mice compared to the control group.
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.
Contacts:
Dr. Jan van Aken, Greenpeace International agriculture expert, +49 151 1805 3415
Dr. Janet Cotter, Greenpeace International Science Unit, +44 7812 174783
Notes to Editors:
(1) In 2005, the European Food Safety Agency EFSA gave a green light for this variety. Without conducting any independent studies and just relying on Monsanto’s data, EFSA wrote it “considers it unlikely that NK603 x MON810 maize will have any adverse effect on human and animal healthâ€. This exemplifies how flawed and ill-designed the European risk assessment for GE crops is.
Dr. Mae Won Ho is a brilliant and fearless truth teller. Her science is impeccable and her voice is loud and strong when it comes to telling the truth about dangerous make believe science. Nowhere is she more vigorous in alerting us to the absurdities and deadly consequences of corporate junk science and junk policies than in the area of Genetically Modified Organisms or GMOs.
The following article is a must read, must share one which I urge you to forward to as many people as possible so that they can join forces to make sure that all legislators understand that the FDA and USDA are not protecting our interests and Congress must take the reins from them before their criminal negligence kills us all.
The reallity is that stark.
Click here (http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/1128/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=25920) to urge your legislators to become supporters of the suite of bills introduced by Rep. Denis Kucinich to require safety assessments of GMOs and require clear labeling of all GMO ingredients and components of food.
And then click here (http://drrimatruthreports.com/index.php?page_id=189) to make a tax deductible, recurring donation so that the Natural Solutions Foundation can continue to bring you the facts you need about your health freedom.
Thanks.
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
www.NaturalSolutionsFoundation.org
www.Organics4U.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMedia.tv
GM is Dangerous and Futile
We Need Organic Sustainable Food and Energy Systems Now
New genetics research invalidates the science underpinning the $73.5 billon global biotech industry and confirms why genetic modification is futile and dangerous; we must implement organic sustainable food and energy systems now Dr. Mae-Wan Ho
Invited Lecture at Conference on Future of Food: Climate Change, GMOs and Food Security, 1-2 October 2008, India International Centre, New Delhi
A fully referenced version of this article is posted on ISIS members’ website. Details here
An electronic version of this report with full references can be downloaded from the ISIS online store. Download Now
digg Add to My Yahoo!
I am deeply and doubly honoured to be part of this important conference on Mahatma Gandhi’s birthday, because it was Vandana Shiva and Tewolde Berhan Gebre Egziabher who inspired me and turned me from an ivory tower academic into a science activist. Consequently, I was thrown out of my university and liberated to join civil society in fighting corrupt science and protecting good independent science.
Food Futures Now , *Organic *Sustainable *Fossil Fuel Free, How organic agriculture and localised food, and energy systems can potentially compensate for all greenhouse gas emissions due to human activities and free us from fossil fuels “Change to gene theory raises new challenges for biotechâ€
The headline appeared in the business section of the International Herald Tribune 3 July 2007 [1]. The article went on to say: “The $73.5 billion global biotech business may soon have to grapple with a discovery that calls into question the scientific principles on which it was founded.â€
It was referring to the findings of project ENCODE (Encyclopedia of DNA elements), organised by the US National Human Genome Research Institute. A consortium of 35 research groups went through 1 percent of the human genome with a fine-tooth comb to find out exactly how genes work.
To their surprise, researchers found that the human genome might not be a “tidy collection of independent genes†after all…Instead, genes appear to operate in a complex network, and interact and overlap with one another and with other components in ways not yet fully understood.â€
The Human Genome Research Institute said that these findings will challenge scientists “to rethink some long-held views about what genes are and what they do.â€
The author of the article Denis Caruso commented that, “the report is likely to have repercussions far beyond the laboratory. The presumption that genes operate independently has been institutionalized since 1976, when the first biotech company was founded. In fact, it is the economic and regulatory foundation on which the entire biotechnology industry is built.†She went on to point out that gene patents and safety assessment based on the same paradigm are also in trouble.
She is right on all counts. I pointed that out 10 years previously when a plethora of findings in molecular genetics had already invalidated the genetic determinist paradigm underpinning the biotech industry. In fact, the paradigm had begun to unravel almost as the industry was starting up twenty years earlier.
The Brave New World of GM Science
In Genetic Engineering Dream or Nightmare, the Brave New World of Bad Science and Big Business [2] first published in 1997/1998 I explained why the science behind GM is wrong and obsolete, and hence dangerous; a story elaborated further in Living with the Fluid Genome [3] published in 2003.
Genetic engineering of plants and animals began in the mid 1970s in the belief that the genome (the totality of all the genetic material of a species) is constant and static, and that the characteristics of organism are simply hardwired in their genome. This was encapsulated in the Central Dogma of molecular biology. The genetic information goes from DNA, the genetic material, to RNA, a kind of intermediate, to protein which determines the characteristic involved, such as tolerance to herbicide, for example. One gene determines one trait, so you can transfer one gene and get exactly the trait you want, be it herbicide tolerance, or resistance to insect pest.
But geneticists soon discovered that the genome is remarkably dynamic and ‘fluid’. It is constantly in conversation with the environment, and that determines which genes are turned on, when, where, by how much and for how long. Moreover, the genetic material itself could also be marked or changed according to experience, and the influence passed on to the next generation. Most of that was known by 1980, long before the Human Genome Project was conceived.
The best thing about the Human Genome Project is to finally explode the myth of genetic determinism [4] (The Myth that Launched a Thousand Companies, SiS 18), revealing the layers of molecular complexity that transmit, interpret and rewrite the genetic texts [5] (Life Beyond the Central Dogma series, SiS 24). The ENCODE project has confirmed and extended the complexities especially with regard to what constitutes a gene. Traditionally, a gene is a sequence of DNA that codes for a protein with a well-defined function. This idea has been well and truly shattered [6]; as Barry Patrick wrote in the Science News [7] “genes are proving to be fragmented, intertwined with other genes, and scattered across the whole genome.â€
The genetic engineer’s idea of a gene is presented in Figure 1. It has a regulatory signal, a promoter that says to the cell, go and make lots of copies of the coding sequence that would be translated into a protein, and a terminator that says stop, end of message. This is what genetic engineers put into cells to make a genetically modified organism (GMO).
A gene expression cassette, the genetic engineer’s idea of a gene
Figure 1. A gene expression cassette, the genetic engineer’s idea of a gene
Instead, within the human genome, and indeed other mammalian genomes, coding sequences are in bits (exons) separated by non-coding introns, and exons contributing to a single protein could be in different parts of the genome. Coding sequences of different proteins frequently overlap. Regulatory signals are similarly scattered upstream, downstream, within the coding sequence or in some other distant part of the genome. Coding sequences occupy just 1.5 percent of the human genome, but between 74 and 93 percent of the genome produce RNA transcripts [7], many now known to have regulatory functions. So much so that the project of mapping genetic predisposition to diseases, the original rationale for the Human Genome Project, has now run into serious trouble.
David M. Altshuler, associate professor of genetics and medicine at Harvard Medical School and his research team showed that the risk for type 2 diabetes involves more than a mutated gene. Instead, diabetes, heart disease, some cancers, and other deadly ailments involve non-coding DNA as well as in genes [8]. “We’re realizing that things happening ‘somewhere else’ in the genome, not in genes, are playing critical roles†in sickness and in health, Altshuler said.
David B. Goldstein at Duke University is very pessimistic. He said the effort to nail down the genetics of most common diseases is not working [9]: “There is absolutely no question that for the whole hope of personalized medicine, the news has been just as bleak as it could be. After doing comprehensive studies for common diseases, we can explain only a few percent of the genetic components of most of these traits.†For schizophrenia and biopolar disorder, there is almost nothing, for type 2 diabetes, 20 variants, but they explain only up to 3 percent of familial clustering, and so on.
Goldstein added: “we have cracked open the human genome and can look at the entire complement of common genetic variants, and what do we find? Almost nothing. That is absolutely beyond belief.â€
That is just what I predicted soon after the human genome sequence was announced [10, 11] (Human DNA ‘BioBank’ Worthless, SiS 13/14; Why Genomics Won’t Deliver, SiS 26)
Fresh attempts are now made to redefine a gene either in terms of a protein product [12] or a transcript [13], neither of which are satisfactory or would save the industry. All patents on genes based on the old concept are no longer valid; ultimately because the patent is awarded on a supposed function attached to a DNA sequence. But as genes exist in bits interweaving with other genes, so are functions. Multiple DNA sequences may serve the same function, and conversely the same DNA sequence can have different functions. Again, I have explained Why Biotech Patents Are Patently Absurd [14].
Despite the bewildering complexities of how the genome works, individual processes are precisely orchestrated and finely tuned by the organism as a whole, in a highly coordinated molecular ‘dance of life’ that’s necessary for survival.
In contrast, genetic engineering in the laboratory is crude, imprecise and invasive. The rogue genes inserted into a genome to make a GMO could land anywhere; typically in a rearranged or defective form, scrambling and mutating the host genome, and tend to move or rearrange further once inserted. Transgene instability is a big problem, and has been so right from the beginning. There is fresh evidence that GM crops grown commercially for years have rearranged [15, 16] (MON810 Genome Rearranged Again. Transgenic Lines Unstable hence Illegal and Ineligible for Protection, SiS 38). This is a real opportunity to challenge the validity of all biotech patents. Another key issue is safety. Transgene instability means that the original transgenic line has turned into something else, and even if it had been assessed as ‘safe’, this is no longer the case.
The genetically modified genes are a big hazard because they do not know the intricate dance of life that has been perfected in billions of years of evolution. That’s ultimately why genetic modification is both dangerous and futile.
Thirty years of GM are more than enough
We’d had 30 years of GM and more than enough damage done, as detailed in the ISP Report The Case for A GM-Free Sustainable World [17] and the dossier GM Science Expose : Hazards Ignored, Fraud, Regulatory Sham, Violation of Farmers Rights [18] we compiled for the European Parliament in June 2007. And more evidence has been piling up since. Why has this been allowed to go on? W documented how national and international regulators and advisory bodies such as the European Food Safety Authority not only routinely ignore the precautionary principle, but also actively abuse science, sidestep the law, and helping to promote GM technology in the face of evidence piling up against the safety of GM food and feed [19] (GM Food Nightmare Unfolding in the Regulatory Sham, ISIS scientific publication).
Let me summarize the evidence stacked up against GMOs.
* No increase in yields
Successive reports [17, 18, 20] confirm that the yields of all major GM crops varieties cultivated are lower than, or at best, equal to yields from non-GM varieties. Studies from 1999 to 2007 consistently show that GM soya decreased yields by 4 to 12 percent compared to non-GM soya, while Bt maize yields from 0 to 12 percent less than conventional isolines. Up to 100 percent failures of Bt cotton crops have been recorded in India [18] (and amply confirmed by the farmer witnesses who are here today). New research from the University of Kansas found a 10 percent average yield drag for Roundup Ready soya [21], and extra manganese is needed for the soil Scientists from the USDA and the University of Georgia found growing GM cotton in the US could result in a drop in income by up to 40 percent [22, 23] (Transgenic Cotton Offers No Advantage, SiS 38)
* No reduction in pesticides use
USDA data showed that GM crops increase pesticide use by 50 million pounds from 1996 to 2003 in the United States [17]. New data paint an even grimmer picture: the use of glyphosate on major crops went up more than 15-fold between 1994 and 2005, along with increases in other herbicides [24] in order to cope with rising glyphosate resistant superweeds [6]. Palmer 3pigweed is a major concern in Georgia, with farmer there having to mow cotton down in fields with glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth [25]. And following close on the health of that is glyphosate resistant giant ragweed [26]. Roundup tolerant canola volunteers are top among the worries of Canadian farmers [27, 28] (Study Based on Farmers’ Experience Exposes Risks of GM Crops, SiS 38)
* Roundup lethal to frogs and toxic to human placental and embryonic cells [18].
Roundup is more toxic than glyphosate, and it is used in more than 80 percent of all GM crops planted in the world.
* GM crops harm wildlife
UK’s farm scale evaluations have found that GM crops harm wildlife [18]; more recently a study led by Loyola University, Chicago, Illinois in the United Stated, found that wastes from Bt corn impaired the growth of a common aquatic insect [29, 30] (Bt Crops Threaten Aquatic Ecosystems, SiS 36). This is just the tip of the iceberg. There is evidence that GM crops, especially Bt crops contribute to the demise of the honeybee worldwide because it compromises their immune system and make them exra-susceptible to attacks by parasitic fungus (31) (Parasitic Fungi and Pesticides Act Synergistically to Kill Honeybees? SiS 35).
* Bt resistance pests and Roundup tolerant superweeds render the two major GM crop traits practically useless [18].
A recent review concluded that [32] “evolved glyphosate-resistant weeds are a major risk for the continued success of glyphosate and transgenic glyphosate-resistant crops.†And the evolution of Bt resistant bollworms worldwide have now been confirmed and documented in more than a dozen fields in Mississippi and Arkansas between 2003 and 2006 [33]. Worse yet, secondary pests now plague the fields and spread to other crops in India [34] (Deadly gift from Monsanto to India, SiS 38).
* Vast areas of forests, pampas and cerrados lost to GM soya in Latin America
Argentina alone has lot 15 m hectares [18]; and this has worsened considerably with the demand for biofuels (see later)
* Epidemic of suicides in the cotton belt of India
An estimated 100 000 farmers have killed themselves between 1993-2003, and a further 16 000 farmers a year have died since Bt cotton was introduced [18]
* GM food and feed linked to deaths and sicknesses
Evidence of serious health impacts in lab tests and from farmers’ fields around the world (more below)
GM food and feed inherently hazardous to health [19]
Here are some highlights from our GM Science dossier [18] on the hazards of GM food and feed. Dr. Irina Ermakova of the Russian Academy of Sciences showed how GM soya made female rats give birth to severely stunted and abnormal litters, with more than half dying in three weeks, and those remaining are sterile. Hundreds of villagers and cotton handlers in India suffer allergy-like symptoms, thousands of sheep died after grazing on the Bt cotton residues, goat and cows as well were reported in 2007 and 2008 [35] (Mass Protests against GM Crops in India , SiS 38). (As reported by farmer witnesses as this conference, the problem is continuing and sterility in offspring of exposed animals has also been observed.) A harmless bean protein transferred to pea when tested on mice cause severe inflammation in the lungs and provoked generalised food sensitivities. Dozens of villagers in the south of the Philippines fell ill when neighbouring GM maize fields came into flower in 2003, at least five have died and some remain ill to this day. A dozen cows died having eaten GM maize in Hesse Germany and more in the herd had to be slaughtered from mysterious illnesses. Arpad Pusztai and his colleagues in the UK found GM potatoes with snowdrop lectin damaged every organ system of young rats; the stomach lining grew twice as thick as controls. Chickens fed GM maize Chardon LL were twice as likely to die as controls. And finally, GM maize Mon 863 was claimed to be as safe as non-GM maize by the company, and accepted as such by European Food Safety Authority. But independent scientists of CriiGen in France re-analysed the data and found signs of liver and kidney toxicity.
Different animals and human beings exposed to a variety of transgenic crops with different traits either fall ill or die. The evidence compels us to consider the possibility that the hazards of GMOs may be inherent to the technology, as I suggested more than ten years ago [2].
Table 1. Summary of Exposure of Animals and Human Beings to GMOs
Species GM species Transgene trait Effect
Rat Soya Roundup Ready Stunting, death, sterility
Humans Cotton Cry1Ac/Cry1Ab Allergy symptoms
Sheep “ “ Death, liver toxicity
Cows “ “ “
Goats “ “ “
Mice Pea Alpha-amylase Inhibitor Lung Inflammation, General food sensitivity
Mice Soya Roundup Ready Liver, pancreas and testis Affected
Humans Maize Cry1Ab Illnesses and death
Rats Maize Cry3Bb liver and kidney toxicity
Cows Maize Cry1Ab/Cry1Ac Death and illnesses
Rats Potato Snowdrop lectin Damage in every organ system. Stomach lining twice as thick as controls
Mice Potato Cry1A Gut lining thickened
Rats Tomato Delay ripening Holes in the stomach
Chickens Maize Glufosinate tolerance Deaths
An epidemic of Morgellons Disease has hit the US and other countries that had been involved in genetic modification technology [36] (Agrobacterium & Morgellons Disease, A GM Connection?. SiS 38). The pathogen is suspected to be Agrobacterium, which has been widely used in smuggling genes into cells to make GMOs. Is this a disease created by GM? There have been close calls before.
US courts rule GM crop field-tests and releases illegal
The message that GM crops are unsafe appears to have got through to the judiciary system in the United States. There have been three court rulings against the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) for failing to carry out proper environmental impact assessment, making the original releases illegal [37] (Approval of GM Crops Illegal, US Federal Courts Rule, SiS 34). These are the first rulings against GMOs in the top producing country in the world, which has been also promoting GMOs aggressively.
The first case was on drug-producing GM crops in Hawaii. The court said that the USDA violated the Endangered Species Act as well as the National Environmental Policy Act.
The second court case not only ruled GM herbicide-tolerant creeping bentgrass illegal, but also that the USDA must halt approval of all new field trials until more rigorous environmental reviews are conducted.
The third decision was passed on Monsanto’s Roundup Ready alfalfa for having been commercial released illegally without an Environment Impact Statement.
An avalanche of bans and rulings strikes GM crops worldwide
There have been numerous bans and restrictions imposed on GM crops in recent years, which say a lot about the inadequacies of regulatory regimes worldwide (see Box 1).
Box 1
Rulings and bans on GMOs between May 2007 and May 2008
* US GM alfalfa ban made permanent [38]
* US Federal Court of Appeals ruled against GM bentgrass again [39]
* Four counties in California have bans or moratorium on GM crops and the first state bill to protect Californian farmers against lawsuits that intimate and harass them when their field are contaminated passed through the Agriculture committee in January 2008 [40]
* Montville USA became the first town outside California to ban GM crops [41]
* South Australia extended its GM ban [42]
* Romania joined EU members in banning GM crop Mon 810 [43], the others are France, Hungary, Italy, Austria, Greece, and Poland
* 13 out of 20 counties in Croatia have declared themselves GM-Free [44]
* Greece renewed its ban on GM maize seeds [44]
* Germany imposed much stricter regulations on GM maize [46]
* Scotland backs GM ban in Europe [47]
* France banned GM maize Mon 810 in February 2008 and passed GMO law in April to guard against contamination by GMO, making it compulsory for farmers to “respect agricultural structures, local ecosystems and non-GMO commercial and production industries†[48, 49]
* Wales is set to ban GM crops [50]
* Switzerland bans crops until 2012 [51]
* More than 230 regions, over 4 000 municipalities and other local entities and tens of thousands of farmers and food producers in Europe have declared themselves GMO-free so far [52]
EU Commissioner for the Environment Stavros Dimas has expressed serious reservations concerning GMOs [53] (GM-Free Europe Beginning?, SiS 36), which is unprecedented in the history of the European Commission. On 7 May 2008, the European Commission delayed a decision on allowing farmers to grow more GM crops, and asked European Food Safety Authority to reconsider its previous review, which it had admitted was inadequate, as it was unable to take indirect and long term impacts into account [54].
No case for GM crops, small scale organic farming is the way ahead
Meanwhile, on 15 April 2008, 400 scientists of the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) released its 2 500-page report [55, 56] (GM-Free Organic Agriculture to Feed the Worldâ€, SiS 38) that took 4 years to complete. It is a thorough examination of global agriculture on a scale comparable to the Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change.
The IAASTD calls for a fundamental change in farming practice to counteract soaring food prices, hunger, poverty and environmental disasters, it says GM crops are controversial with respect to safety for health and the environment, and will not play a substantial role in addressing climate change, loss of biodiversity, hunger and poverty. Small scale farmers and agro-ecological methods are the way forward, and indigenous and local knowledge are as important as formal scientific knowledge. It warns that growing crops for biofuels could worsen food shortages and price rises.
The conclusions of the IAASTD are remarkably similar to our own report Food Futures Now *Organic *Sustainable *Fossil Fuel Free [57] launched in UK Parliament a week later.
Our Food Futures Now report goes a step further. We argue that only organic agriculture can truly feed the world. More than that, organic agriculture and localised food and energy systems can potentially compensate for all greenhouse emissions due to human activities and free us from fossil fuels, and we need to implement this urgently.
The UN has declared 2008 the year of the Global Food Crisis, and it has been the top news story everyday for months now as the crisis deepens. Food prices increased by an average of 40 percent last year; a string of food riots and protests spread around the world including the UK, and more than 25 000 farmers killed themselves in India.
Most commentators agree that the immediate cause of the food crisis is the divestment of food grains into producing biofuels. BusinessWeek identified Monsanto as a “prime beneficiaryâ€. Its stock correlated closely with the price of oil (better than ExxonMobile), and hardly correlated with the price of corn, basically because no one will eat its GM corn. Nevertheless the pro-GM lobby are out in force, using the food crisis to promote GM crops.
GM crops are one big failed experiment based on an obsolete scientific theory, and this failure has been evident since 2004 if not before [58] (Puncturing the GM Myths, SiS 22). Apart from yielding less and requiring more pesticides, anecdotal evidence since 2005 from farmers around the world indicates that GM crops also require more water [59]. Industrial Green Revolution agriculture is now generally acknowledged to be a major driver of climate change as well as being vulnerable to climate change because of its heavy dependence on fossil energies and water, and its susceptibility to pests, diseases and climate extremes [56, 60, 61] (Beware the New “Doubly Green Revolution”, SiS 37)..GM crops have all the worst features of industrial Green Revolution varieties exaggerated, and not least, there are outstanding safety concerns as I mentioned. Growing GM crops for biofuels does not make them safe, as they will contaminate our food crops all the same.
Any further indulgence in GMOs will surely damage our chances of surviving global warming. We must get on with the urgent business of building organic, sustainable food and energy systems right now.
printer friendly version
Recent Publications
The Rainbow and the Worm, The Physics of Organisms
The Rainbow and the Worm, The Physics of Organisms “Probably the Most Important Book for the Coming Scientific Revolution†Now in its Third Edition
Buy Now|More info
Food Futures Now
Food Futures Now: *Organic *Sustainable *Fossil Fuel Free How organic agriculture and localised food (and energy) systems can potentially compensate for all greenhouse gas emissions due to human activities and free us from fossil fuels
Buy Now|More info
Science in Society magazine The only radical science magazine on earth
Science in Society 39 OUT NOW! Order your copy from our online store.
GM Science Exposed
GM Science Exposed. A comprehensive dossier containing more than 160 fully referenced articles from the Science in Society archives.
Buy Now|More info
GMO Free: Exposing the Hazards of Biotechnology to Ensure the Integrity of our Food SupplyGMO Free: Exposing the Hazards of Biotechnology to Ensure the Integrity of our Food Supply
Buy Now|More info
Join the I-SIS mailing list; enter your email address html asci
I-SIS is a not-for-profit organisation, depending on donations, membership fees, subscriptions, and merchandise sales to continue its work. Find out more about membership here