-------- Original Message --------
| Subject: | [Health_and_Healing] [Ban-GEF] GM industry silences scientists who find harm |
|---|---|
| Date: | Mon, 28 Jun 2010 01:33:47 -0400 |
| From: | Dr. Betty Martini,D.Hum. <bettym19@mindspring.com> |
| Reply-To: | Health_and_Healing@yahoogroups.com |
>From: Robert Mann <robtm@xtra.co.nz> >Subject: [Ban-GEF] GM industry silences scientists who find harm > > <mailto:ban-gef-request@txinfinet.com?subject=subscribe> >Sender: ban-gef-bounces@txinfinet.com >Errors-To: ban-gef-bounces@txinfinet.com > >Great article summarizing how the GM industry >silences scientists who find harm with GMOs! > > >http://www.foodconsumer.org/newsite/Safety/gmo/problems_with_genetically_modified_foods_2902100104.html > >Biochemist Arpad Pusztai had more than 300 >articles and 12 books to his credit and was the >world's top expert in his field. But when he >accidentally discovered that genetically >modified (GM) foods are dangerous, he became the >biotech industry's bad-boy poster child, setting >an example for other scientists thinking about blowing the whistle. > >In the early 1990s, Dr. Pusztai was awarded a $3 >million grant by the UK government to design the >system for safety testing genetically modified >organisms (GMOs). His team included more than >20 scientists working at three facilities, >including the Rowett Institute in Aberdeen, >Scotland, the top nutritional research lab in >the UK, and his employer for the previous 35 >years. The results of Pusztai's work were >supposed to become the required testing >protocols for all of Europe. But when he fed >supposedly harmless GM potatoes to rats, things didn't go as planned. > >Within just 10 days, the animals developed >potentially pre-cancerous cell growth, smaller >brains, livers, and testicles, partially >atrophied livers, and damaged immune >systems. Moreover, the cause was almost >certainly side effects from the process of >genetic engineering itself. In other words, the >GM foods on the market, which are created from >the same process, might have similar affects on humans. > >With permission from his director, Pusztai was >interviewed on TV and expressed his concerns >about GM foods. He became a hero at his >institute - for two days. Then came the phone >calls from the pro-GMO prime minister's office >to the institute's director. The next morning, >Pusztai was fired. He was silenced with threats >of a lawsuit, his team was dismantled, and the >protocols never implemented. His Institute, the >biotech industry, and the UK government, >together launched a smear campaign to destroy Pusztai's reputation. > >Eventually, an invitation to speak before >Parliament lifted his gag order and his research >was published in the prestigious Lancet. No >similar in-depth studies have yet tested the GM >foods eaten every day by Americans. > > >Irina Ermakova, a senior scientist at the >Russian National Academy of Sciences, was >shocked to discover that more than half of the >baby rats in her experiment died within three >weeks. She had fed the mothers GM soy flour >purchased at a supermarket. The babies from >mothers fed natural non-GMO soy, however, only >suffered a 10% death rate. She repeated her >experiment three times with similar results. > >Dr. Ermakova reported her preliminary findings >at a conference in October 2005, asking the >scientific community to replicate her study. >Instead, she was attacked and vilified. Her >boss told her to stop doing anymore GM food >research. Samples were stolen from her lab, and >a paper was even set fire on her desk. One of >her colleagues tried to comfort her by saying, >"Maybe the GM soy will solve the overpopulation problem." > >Of the mostly spurious criticisms leveled at >Ermakova, one was significant enough to raise >doubts about the cause of the deaths. She did >not conduct a biochemical analysis of the >feed. Without it, we don't know if some rogue >toxin had contaminated the soy flour. But more >recent events suggest that whatever caused the >high infant mortality was not unique to her one >bag of GM flour. In November 2005, the supplier >of rat food to the laboratory where Ermakova >worked began using GM soy in the >formulation. All the rats were now eating >it. After two months, Ermakova asked other >scientists about the infant mortality rate in >their experiments. It had skyrocketed to over 55%. > >It's been four years since these findings were >reported. No one has yet repeated Ermakova's >study, even though it would cost just a few thousand dollars. > > >Embryologist Andrés Carrasco told a leading >Buenos Aires newspaper about the results of his >research into Roundup, the herbicide sold in >conjunction with Monsanto's genetically >engineered RoundupReady crops. Dr. Carrasco, >who works in Argentina's Ministry of Science, >said his studies of amphibians suggest that the >herbicide could cause defects in the brain, >intestines, and hearts of fetuses. Moreover, >the amount of Roundup used on GM soy fields was >as much as 1,500 times greater than that which >created the defects. Tragically, his research >had been inspired by the experience of desperate >peasant and indigenous communities who were >suffering from exposure to toxic herbicides used >on the GM soy fields throughout Argentina. > >According to an article in Grain, the biotech >industry "mounted an unprecedented attack on >Carrasco, ridiculing his research and even >issuing personal threats." In addition, four >men arrived unannounced at his laboratory and >were extremely aggressive, attempting to >interrogate Carrasco and obtain details of his >study. "It was a violent, disproportionate, >dirty reaction," he said. "I hadn't even >discovered anything new, only confirmed conclusions that others had reached." > >Argentina's Association of Environmental Lawyers >filed a petition calling for a ban on Roundup, >and the Ministry of Defense banned GM soy from its fields. > > >Epidemiologist Judy Carman used to investigate >outbreaks of disease for a state government in >Australia. She knows that health problems >associated with GM foods might be impossible to >track or take decades to discover. Moreover, >the superficial, short-term animal feeding >studies usually do not evaluate "biochemistry, >immunology, tissue pathology, gut function, >liver function, and kidney function" and are too >short to test for cancer or reproductive or >child health. Dr. Carman has critiqued the GMO >approval process on behalf of the Public Health >Association of Australia and speaks openly about >her concerns. As a result, she is repeatedly >attacked. Pro-GM scientists threatened >disciplinary action through her Vice-Chancellor, >and circulated a defamatory letter to government and university officials. > >Carman was awarded a grant by the Western >Australia government to conduct some of the few >long-term animal feeding studies on >GMOs. Apparently concerned about what she might >find, GMO advocates wrote letters to the >government demanding that the grant be >withdrawn. One scientist tried to convince the >Western Australia Agriculture minister that >sufficient safety research had been conducted >and he should therefore cancel the grant. As >his evidence, however, he presented a report >summarizing only 60 GMO animal feeding studies - >an infinitesimal amount of research to justify >exposing the entire population to GM foods. > >A closer investigation, however, revealed that >most of the 60 were not safety studies at >all. They were production studies, measuring, >for example, the animals' carcass weight. Only >9 contained data applicable to human >health. And 6 of the 9 showed adverse effects >in animals that ate GM feed! Furthermore, there >were several other studies with adverse findings >that were mysteriously missing from the >compilation. Carman points out that the report >"does not support claims that GM crops are safe >to eat. On the contrary, it provides evidence >that GM crops may be harmful to health." > >When the Western Government refused to withdraw >the grant, opponents successfully interfered >with Carman's relationship with the university >where she was to do the research. > > >Prominent virologist Terje Traavik presented >preliminary data at a February 2004 meeting at >the UN Biosafety Protocol Conference, showing that: >* Filipinos living next to a GM cornfield >developed serious symptoms while the corn was pollinating; >* Genetic material inserted into GM crops >transferred to rat organs after a single meal; and >* Key safety assumptions about genetically >engineered viruses were overturned, calling into >question the safety of using these viruses in vaccines. >The biotech industry mercilessly attacked Dr. >Traavik. Their excuse?-he presented unpublished >work. But presenting preliminary data at >professional conferences is a long tradition in >science, something that the biotech industry >itself relied on in 1999 to try to counter the >evidence that butterflies were endangered by GM corn. > >Ironically, three years after attacking Traavik, >the same biotech proponents sharply criticized a >peer-reviewed publication for not citing >unpublished data that had been presented at a >conference. The paper shows how the runoff of GM >Bt corn into streams can kill the "caddis fly," >which may seriously upset marine ecosystems. The >study set off a storm of attacks against its >author, ecologist Emma Rosi-Marshall, which >Nature described in a September 2009 article as a "hail of abuse." > >Companies Prevent Studies on Their GM Crops > >When Ohio State University plant ecologist >Allison Snow discovered problematic side effects >in GM sunflowers, Pioneer Hi-Bred International >and Dow AgroSciences blocked further research by >withholding GM seeds and genes. After Marc >Lappé and Britt Bailey found significant >reductions in cancer-fighting isoflavones in >Monsanto's GM soybeans, the seed seller, Hartz, >told them they could no longer provide >samples. Research by a plant geneticist at a >leading US university was also thwarted when two >companies refused him GM corn. In fact, almost >no independent studies are conducted that might >find problems. According to a scathing opinion >piece in an August 2009 Scientific American, >"Agritech companies have given themselves veto >power over the work of independent researchers. >. . . Only studies that the seed companies have >approved ever see the light of a peer-reviewed journal." > >A group of 24 corn insect scientists protested >this restriction in a letter submitted to the >Environmental Protection Agency. They warned >that the inability to access GM seeds from >biotech companies means there can be no truly >independent research on the critical questions. >The scientists, of course, withheld their >identities for fear of reprisals from the companies. > >Restricted access is not limited to the >US. When a Japanese scientist wanted to conduct >animal feeding studies on the GM soybeans under >review in Japan, both the government and the >bean's maker DuPont refused to give him any >samples. Hungarian Professor Bela Darvas >discovered that Monsanto's GM corn hurt >endangered species in his country. Monsanto >immediately shut off his supplies. Dr. Darvas >later gave a speech on his preliminary findings >and discovered that a false and incriminating >report about his research was circulating. He >traced it to a Monsanto public relations >employee, who claimed it mysteriously appeared >on her desk - so she faxed it out. > > >GMO Contamination: Don't Ask and Definitely Don't Tell > >In 2005, a scientist had gathered seed samples >from all over Turkey to evaluate the extent of >contamination by GM varieties. According to the >Turkish Daily News, just before her testing was >complete, she was reassigned to another >department and access to her lab was denied. > >The unexpected transfer may have saved this >Turkish scientist from an even worse fate, had >she discovered and reported contamination. Ask >Ignacio Chapela, a microbial ecologist from UC >Berkeley. In 2001, he discovered that the >indigenous corn varieties in Mexico-the source >of the world's genetic diversity for corn-had >become contaminated through cross pollination >with GM varieties. The government had a ban >against GM corn to prevent just this >possibility, but apparently US corn imported for >food had been planted nonetheless. > >Dr. Chapela submitted the finding to Nature, and >as a courtesy that he later regretted, informed >the Mexican government about the pending >publication. He was called in to meet with a >furious Director of the Commission of Biosafety >and GMOs. Chapela's confirmation of >contamination would hinder introduction of GM >corn. Therefore the government's top biotech >man demanded that he withdraw his >article. According to Chapela, the official >intimidated and threatened him, even implying, >"We know where your children go to school." > >When a traumatized Chapela still did not back >down, the Underminister for Agriculture later >sent him a fax claiming that because of his >scientific paper, Chapela would be held >personally responsible for all damages caused to >agriculture and to the economy in general. > >The day Chapela's paper was published, Mary >Murphy and Andura Smetacek began posting >messages to a biotechnology listserve called >AgBioWorld, distributed to more than 3,000 >scientists. They falsely claimed that Chapela >was biased, that his paper had not been >peer-reviewed, that Chapela was "first and >foremost an activist," and his research was >published in collusion with >environmentalists. Soon, hundreds of other >messages appeared, repeating or embellishing the >accusations. The listserve launched a petition >and besieged Naturewith a worldwide campaign demanding retraction. > >UC Berkeley also received letters from all over >the world trying to convince them not to grant >Chapela tenure. He had overwhelming support by >his college and department, but the >international biotech lobby was too >much. Chapela's tenure was denied. After he >filed a lawsuit, the university eventually reversed its decision. > >When investigators later analyzed the email >characteristics sent by agitators Mary Murphy >and Andura Smetacek, the two turned out not to >be the average citizens they claimed. According >to the Guardian, both were fabricated names used >by a public relations firm that worked for >Monsanto. Some of Smetacek's emails also had the >internet protocol address of >gatekeeper2.monsanto.com-the server owned by Monsanto. > >Science and Debate is Silenced > >The attacks on scientists have taken its >toll. According to Dr. Chapela, there is a de >facto ban on scientists "asking certain >questions and finding certain results." He >says, "It's very hard for us to publish in this >field. People are scared." He told Nature that >young people "are not going into this field >precisely because they are discouraged by what they see." > >New Zealand Parliament list-MP Sue Kedgley told >a Royal Commission in 2001: "Personally I have >been contacted by telephone and e-mail by a >number of scientists who have serious concerns >about aspects of the research that is taking >place . . . and the increasingly close ties that >are developing between science and commerce, but >who are convinced that if they express these >fears publicly, . . . or even if they asked the >awkward and difficult questions, they will be eased out of their institution." > >University of Minnesota biologist Phil Regal >testified before the same Commission, "I think >the people who boost genetic engineering are >going to have to do a mea culpa and ask for >forgiveness, like the Pope did on the >inquisition." Sue Kedgley has a different >idea. She recommends we "set up human clinical >trials using volunteers of genetically >engineered scientists and their families, >because I think they are so convinced of the >safety of the products that they are creating >and I'm sure they would very readily volunteer >to become part of a human clinical trial." > >To learn more about the health dangers of GMOs, >and what you can do to help end the genetic >engineering of our food supply, visitwww.ResponsibleTechnology.org. > >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: >http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp >_______________________________________________ >Ban-GEF mailing list >Ban-GEF@txinfinet.com >http://204.greenbuilder.com/mailman/listinfo/ban-gef «¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤» § Health_and_Healing - PULSE ON 21st CENTURY ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE! § http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Health_and_Healing Subscribe send email to: Health_and_Healing-subscribe@yahoogroups.com DETOX WITH ALL NATURAL PURE GREEN CALCIUM BENTONITE CLAY USED INTERNAL/EXTERNAL http://clayadvantage.com/ THE OPEN LINE NEWSPAPER, HEALTH NEWS, SPIRITUAL, ENVIRONMENT, ETC. http://WWW.THEOPENLINE.ORG ENERGY HEALING TECHNIQUE FOR CHRONIC PAIN, PTSD & OTHER ISSUES THAT TROUBLE YOU. http://vibrantenergy.webs.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment