Thread: 5411 Genetically Modified Foods: Toxins and Reproductive Failu
5411 Genetically Modified Foods: Toxins
and Reproductive Failu
United States
2007-11-06 18:21:20
Spilling the Beans, (delayed) July 2007
[To view this newsletter on the website,click
here]
The July newsletter was delayed so that we
could share this exciting news. Donations to our Institute are being
matched dollar for dollar right now, bywww.mercola.com,
one of the world’s largest health-oriented websites. To have your donation
or member fee matched by The Mercola.com Foundation, go towww.responsibletechnology.org/donate.
For a more in-depth look at 65 health risks of GM foods,
excerpted from Jeffrey Smith's comprehensive new book Genetic Roulette:
The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, click
here.
Genetically
Modified Foods: Toxins and Reproductive Failures
By Jeffrey
M. Smith
Rhetoric from
Washington since the early 1990s proclaims that genetically modified (GM)
foods are no different from their natural counterparts that have existed
for centuries. But this is a political, not a scientific assertion.
Numerous scientists at the FDA consistently described these newly
introduced gene-spliced foods as cause for concern. In addition to their
potential to produce hard-to-detect allergies and nutritional problems,
the scientists said that “The possibility of unexpected, accidental
changes in genetically engineered plants” might produce “unexpected high
concentrations of plant toxicants.”[1]
GM crops, they said, might have “Increased levels of known naturally
occurring toxins, . . . appearance of new, not previously identified”
toxins, and an increased tendency to gather “toxic substances from the
environment” such as “pesticides or heavy metals.” They recommended
testing every GM food “before it enters the marketplace.”[2]
But the FDA was under orders from the first Bush White House to promote
the biotechnology industry, and the political appointee in charge of
agency policy was Monsanto’s former attorney—later their vice president.
The FDA policy ignored the scientists’ warnings and allowed GM food crops
onto the market without any required safety studies.
From the few
safety tests that have been conducted, the results are disturbing—lab
animals fed GM diets show damage to virtually every system studied.
Reports from farmers are even less encouraging—thousands of sick, sterile
and dead animals are traced to GM feed.[3]
GM diet shows
toxic reactions in digestive tract
The very first
crop submitted to the FDA’s voluntary consultation process, the FlavrSavr
tomato, showed evidence of toxins. Out of 20 female rats fed the GM
tomato, 7 developed stomach lesions.[4]
The director of FDA’s Office of Special Research Skills wrote that the
tomatoes did not demonstrate a “reasonable certainty of no harm,”[5]
which is their normal standard of safety. The Additives Evaluation Branch
agreed that “unresolved questions still remain.”[6]
The political appointees, however, did not require that the tomato be
withdrawn.[*]
According to Arpad
Pusztai, PhD, one of the world’s leading experts in GM food safety
assessments, the type of stomach lesions linked to the tomatoes “could
lead to life-endangering hemorrhage, particularly in the elderly who use
aspirin to prevent [blood clots].”[7]
Pusztai believes that the digestive tract should be the first target of GM
food risk assessment, because the gut is the first (and largest) point of
contact with the foods; it can reveal various reactions to toxins. He was
upset, however, that the research on the FlavrSavr never looked passed the
stomach to the intestines. Other studies that did look found
problems.
Mice were fed potatoes
with an added bacterial gene, which produced an insecticide called
Bt-toxin. Scientists analyzed the lower part of their small intestines
(ileum) and found abnormal and damaged cells, as well as proliferative
cell growth.[8]
Rats fed potatoes engineered to produce a different type of insecticide
(GNA lectin from the snowdrop plant) also showed proliferative cell growth
in both the stomach and intestinal walls (see photo - click here for larger
image).[9]
Although the guts of rats fed GM peas were not examined for cell growth,
the intestines were mysteriously heavier; possibly resulting from such
growth.[10]
Cell proliferation can be a precursor to cancer and is of special
concern.
GM diets cause
liver damage
The state of the
liver—a main detoxifier for the body—is another indicator of
toxins.
Rats fed the GNA lectin
potatoes described above had smaller and partially atrophied
livers.[11]
Rats fed Monsanto’s Mon 863
corn, engineered to produce Bt-toxin, had liver lesions and other
indications of toxicity.[12]
Rabbits fed GM soy showed
altered enzyme production in their livers as well as higher metabolic
activity.[13]
The livers of rats fed Roundup
Ready canola were 12%–16% heavier, possibly due to liver disease or
inflammation.[14]
And microscopic analysis of the
livers of mice fed Roundup Ready soybeans revealed altered gene
expression and structural and functional changes.[15] Many of these changes reversed after the mice diet was switched
to non-GM soy, indicating that GM soy was the culprit. The findings,
according to molecular geneticist Michael Antoniou, PhD, “are not random
and must reflect some ‘insult’ on the liver by the GM soy.”Antoniou, who does human gene therapy research in King’s College
London, said that although the long-term consequences of the GM soy diet
are not known, it “could lead to liver damage and consequently general
toxemia.”[16]
Higher death
rates and organ damage
Some studies
showed higher death rates in GM-fed animals. In the FlavrSavr tomato
study, for example, a note in the appendix indicated that 7 of 40
rats died within two weeks and were replaced.[17]
In another study, chickens fed the herbicide tolerant “Liberty Link” corn
died at twice the rate of those fed natural corn.[18]
But in these two industry-funded studies, the deaths were dismissed
without adequate explanation or follow-up.
In addition, the
cells in the pancreas of mice fed Roundup Ready soy had profound changes
and produced significantly less digestive enzymes;[19]
in rats fed a GM potato, the pancreas was enlarged.[20]
In various analyses of kidneys, GM-fed animals showed lesions, toxicity,
altered enzyme production or inflammation. Enzyme production in the hearts
of mice was altered by GM soy.[21]
And GM potatoes caused slower growth in the brain of rats.[22]
Reproductive
failures and infant mortality
In both mice and rats fed Roundup
Ready soybeans, their testicles showed dramatic changes. In rats, the
organs were dark blue instead of pink (see photo - click here for larger
image).[23]
In mice, young sperm cells were altered.[24]
Embryos of GM soy-fed mice also showed temporary changes in their DNA
function, compared to those whose parents were fed non-GM soy.[25]
More dramatic
results were discovered by a leading scientist at the Russian National
Academy of sciences. Female rats were fed GM soy, starting two weeks
before they were mated.
Over a series
of three experiments, 51.6 percent of the offspring from the GM-fed
group died within the first three weeks, compared to 10 percent from the
non-GM soy group, and 8.1 percent for non-soy controls.
“High pup
mortality was characteristic of every litter from mothers fed the GM soy
flour.”[26]
The average
size and weight of the GM-fed offspring was quite a bit
smaller.[27]
In a
preliminary study, the GM-fed offspring were unable to
conceive.[28]
After the three
feeding trials, the supplier of rat food used at the Russian laboratory
began using GM soy in their formulation. Since all the rats housed at the
facility were now eating GM soy, no non-GM fed controls were available for
subsequent GM feeding trials; follow-up studies were canceled. After
two months on the GM soy diet, however, the infant mortality rate of rats
throughout the facility had skyrocketed to 55.3 percent (99 of
179).[29]
Farmers report
livestock sterility and deaths
About two dozen
farmers reported that thousands of their pigs had reproductive problems
when fed certain varieties of Bt corn. Pigs were sterile, had false
pregnancies, or gave birth to bags of water. Some cows and bulls also
became sterile. Bt corn was also implicated by farmers in the deaths of
cows, horses, water buffaloes, and chickens.[30]
When Indian
shepherds let their sheep graze continuously on Bt cotton plants, within
5-7 days, one out of four sheep died. There was an estimated 10,000 sheep
deaths in the region in 2006, with more reported in 2007. Post mortems on
the sheep showed severe irritation and black patches in both intestines
and liver (as well as enlarged bile ducts). Investigators said preliminary
evidence “strongly suggests that the sheep mortality was due to a toxin. .
. . most probably Bt-toxin.”[31]
The warnings of
the FDA scientists appear to have come true. But we were not supposed to
know about their concerns. The agency’s internal memos were only made
public due to a lawsuit. Instead, we were supposed to believe the official
FDA policy, claiming that the agency is not aware of information showing
that GM foods are meaningfully different. This statement, crafted by
political appointees, directly contradicts the scientific consensus at the
FDA.
Nearly every
independent animal feeding safety study on GM foods shows adverse or
unexplained effects. But we were not supposed to know about these problems
either—the biotech industry works overtime to try to hide them. Industry
studies described above, for example, are neither peer-reviewed nor
published. It took lawsuits to make two of them available. And adverse
findings by independent scientists are often suppressed, ignored, or
denied. Moreover, researchers that discover problems from GM foods have
been fired, stripped of responsibilities, deprived of tenure, and even
threatened. The myth that GM crops are the same safe food we have always
eaten continues to circulate.
With the
overwhelming evidence of problems since their introduction in 1996,
however, it is likely that GM foods are contributing to the deterioration
of health in the United States. Without human clinical trials or
post-marketing surveillance, we can’t tell which worsening health
statistic may be due to these foods. But we also can’t afford to wait
until we find out. GM foods must be removed from our diet immediately.
Fortunately, more and more people are making healthy non-GM choices for
themselves and their family. To learn which foods are genetically modified
and how to protect yourself, visitwww.GeneticRoulette.com.
[*] Calgene had submitted data on
two lines of GM tomatoes, both using the same inserted gene. They
voluntarily elected to market only the variety that was not associated
with the lesions. This was not required by the FDA, which did not
block approvals on the lesion-associated variety. The FlavrSavr tomato has
since been taken off the market. After the FlavrSavr, no other biotech
company has submitted such detailed data to the FDA. And the superficial
summaries they do present to the agency are dismissed by critics as
woefully inadequate to judge safety.
[1]
Edwin J. Mathews, Ph.D., in a memorandum to the Toxicology Section of the
Biotechnology Working Group. Subject: Analysis of the Major Plant
Toxicants. Dated October 28, 1991
[2]
Division of Food Chemistry and Technology and Division of Contaminants
Chemistry, “Points to Consider for Safety Evaluation of Genetically
Modified Foods: Supplemental Information,” November 1, 1991,www.biointegrity.org
[3]
Jeffrey M. Smith, Genetic Roulette:The Documented Health Risks
of Genetically Engineered Foods, Yes! Books, Fairfield, IA USA
2007
[4]
Department of Veterinary Medicine, FDA, correspondence June 16, 1993. As
quoted in Fred A. Hines, Memo to Dr. Linda Kahl. “Flavr Savr Tomato: . . .
Pathology Branch’s Evaluation of Rats with Stomach Lesions From Three
Four-Week Oral (Gavage) Toxicity Studies . . . and an Expert Panel’s
Report,” Alliance for Bio-Integrity (June 16, 1993)http://www.biointegrity.org/FDAdocs/17/view1.html
[5]
Robert J. Scheuplein, Memo to the FDA Biotechnology Coordinator and
others, “Response to Calgene Amended Petition,” Alliance for Bio-Integrity
(October 27, 1993)www.biointegrity.org
[6]
Carl B. Johnson to Linda Kahl and others, “Flavr Savr™ Tomato:
Significance of Pending DHEE Question,” Alliance for Bio-Integrity
(December 7, 1993)www.biointegrity.org
[8]
Nagui H. Fares, Adel K. El-Sayed, “Fine Structural Changes in the Ileum of
Mice Fed on Endotoxin Treated Potatoes and Transgenic Potatoes,”Natural Toxins 6, no. 6 (1998): 219–233.
[9]
Stanley W. B. Ewen and Arpad Pusztai, “Effect of diets containing
genetically modified potatoes expressing Galanthus nivalis lectin on rat
small intestine,” Lancet, 1999 Oct 16; 354 (9187):
1353-4.
[10]
Arpad Pusztai, “Facts Behind the GM Pea Controversy: Epigenetics,
Transgenic Plants & Risk Assessment,” Proceedings of the
Conference,December 1st 2005(Frankfurtam Main,
Germany: Literaturhaus, 2005).
[11]
Arpad Pusztai, “Can science give us the tools for recognizing possible
health risks of GM food,” Nutrition and Health, 2002, Vol 16 Pp
73-84.
[13]
R. Tudisco, P. Lombardi, F. Bovera, D. d’Angelo, M. I. Cutrignelli, V.
Mastellone, V. Terzi, L. Avallone, F. Infascelli, “Genetically Modified
Soya Bean in Rabbit Feeding: Detection of DNA Fragments and Evaluation of
Metabolic Effects by Enzymatic Analysis,” Animal Science 82 (2006):
193–199.
[14]
Comments to ANZFA about Applications A346, A362 and A363 from the Food
Legislation and Regulation Advisory Group (FLRAG) of the Public Health
Association of Australia (PHAA) on behalf of the PHAA, “Food produced from
glyphosate-tolerant canola line GT73,”www.iher.org.au/
[15]
M. Malatesta, C. Caporaloni, S. Gavaudan, M. B. Rocchi, S. Serafini, C.
Tiberi, G. Gazzanelli, “Ultrastructural Morphometrical and
Immunocytochemical Analyses of Hepatocyte Nuclei from Mice Fed on
Genetically Modified Soybean,” Cell Struct Funct. 27 (2002):
173–180
[17]
Arpad Pusztai, “Can Science Give Us the Tools for Recognizing Possible
Health Risks for GM Food?” Nutrition and Health 16 (2002):
73–84.
[18]
S. Leeson, “The Effect of Glufosinate Resistant Corn on Growth of Male
Broiler Chickens,” Department of Animal and Poultry Sciences, University
of Guelph, Report No. A56379, July 12, 1996.
[19]
Malatesta, et al, “Ultrastructural Analysis of Pancreatic Acinar Cells
from Mice Fed on Genetically modified Soybean,” J Anat. 2002 November;
201(5): 409–415; see also M. Malatesta, M. Biggiogera, E. Manuali, M. B.
L. Rocchi, B. Baldelli, G. Gazzanelli, “Fine Structural Analyses of
Pancreatic Acinar Cell Nuclei from Mice Fed on GM Soybean,” Eur J
Histochem 47 (2003): 385–388.
[20]
Arpad Pusztai, “Can science give us the tools for recognizing possible
health risks of GM food,” Nutrition and Health, 2002, Vol 16 Pp
73-84
[21]
R. Tudisco, P. Lombardi, F. Bovera, D. d’Angelo, M. I. Cutrignelli, V.
Mastellone, V. Terzi, L. Avallone, F. Infascelli, “Genetically Modified
Soya Bean in Rabbit Feeding: Detection of DNA Fragments and Evaluation of
Metabolic Effects by Enzymatic Analysis,”Animal Science 82 (2006):
193–199.
[22]
Arpad Pusztai, “Can science give us the tools for recognizing possible
health risks of GM food,” Nutrition and Health, 2002, Vol 16 Pp
73-84
[23]
Irina Ermakova, “Experimental Evidence of GMO Hazards,” Presentation at
Scientists for a GM Free Europe, EU Parliament, Brussels, June 12,
2007
[24]
L. Vecchio et al, “Ultrastructural Analysis of Testes from Mice Fed on
Genetically Modified Soybean,” European Journal of Histochemistry
48, no. 4 (Oct–Dec 2004):449–454.
[25]
Oliveri et al., “Temporary Depression of Transcription in Mouse
Pre-implantion Embryos from Mice Fed on Genetically Modified Soybean,”
48th Symposium of the Society for Histochemistry,Lake
Maggiore (Italy),September 7–10,
2006.
[26]
I.V.Ermakova, “Genetically Modified Organisms and Biological Risks,”
Proceedings of International Disaster Reduction Conference (IDRC)
Davos, Switzerland August 27th – September 1st, 2006:
168–172.
[27]
Irina Ermakova, “Genetically modified soy leads to the decrease of weight
and high mortality of rat pups of the first generation. Preliminary
studies,” Ecosinform 1 (2006): 4–9.
[28]
Irina Ermakova, “Experimental Evidence of GMO Hazards,” Presentation at
Scientists for a GM Free Europe, EU Parliament, Brussels, June 12,
2007
[29]
I.V.Ermakova “GMO: Life itself intervened into the experiments,” Letter,
EcosInform N2 (2006): 3–4.
[30]
Jeffrey M. Smith, Genetic Roulette:The Documented Health Risks
of Genetically Engineered Foods, Yes! Books, Fairfield, IA USA
2007
[31]
“Mortality in Sheep Flocks after Grazing on Bt Cotton
Fields—Warangal District, Andhra Pradesh” Report of the Preliminary
Assessment, April 2006,http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp
Spilling the Beans is a
monthly column available at www.responsibletechnology.org. The website also offers eater-friendly
tips for avoiding GMOs at home and in restaurants.
Permission is
granted to publishers and webmasters to reproduce issues of Spilling
the Beans in whole or in part. Just email us atseedsofdeception.com">columnseedsofdeception.com to let us know who you are and what your
circulation is, so we can keep track.
The Institute for
Responsible Technology is working to end the genetic engineering of our
food supply and the outdoor release of GM crops. We warmly welcome your
donations and support.
Donations and membership fees to our
Institute are currently being matched by The Mercola.com
Foundation (See www.mercola.com, one of the world’s largest
health-oriented websites.) To have your tax-deductible donation matched by
The Mercola.com Foundation, go towww.responsibletechnology.org/donate.
Note, membership to the Institute
for Responsible Technology costs $25 per year. New members receive The GMO
Trilogy, a three-disc set produced by Jeffrey Smith (seewww.GMOTrilogy.com).
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MedicalConspiracies" group.
To post to this group, send email to:
MedicalConspiraciesgooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to:
MedicalConspiracies-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at:
http://groups.google.com/group/MedicalConspiracies
«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«
If Paranormal Research and Medical Conspiracies are of interest check out:
Paranormal_Research = Scientific Data & Health Conspiracies
To visit Paranormal_Research on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Paranormal_Research/
To subscribe to this group, send an email to:
Paranormal_Research-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Any information here in is for educational purpose only, it may be news related, purely speculation or someone's opinion, If health related always consult with a qualified health practitioner before deciding on any course of treatment, especially for serious or life-threatening illnesses.
**COPYRIGHT NOTICE**
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,
any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---