FOOD Bad News: First ever long term peer reviewed GMO feed study
The heat is on already. The study is being bashed right out of the gate. No surprise there, of course.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/gmcrops-safety-idUSL5E8KJC1220120919
UPDATE 3-Study on Monsanto GM corn concerns draws scepticism
Wed Sep 19, 2012 12:56pm EDT
* Paris asks health body to investigate French study findings
* But external experts strongly critical of study methods
* French scientist has led previous research critical of GM
* GM crops unpopular in Europe but widely used in U.S.
By Ben Hirschler and Kate Kelland
LONDON, Sept 19 (Reuters) - In a study that prompted sharp criticism from other experts, French scientists said on Wednesday that rats fed on Monsanto's genetically modified corn or exposed to its top-selling weedkiller suffered tumours and multiple organ damage.
The French government asked the country's health watchdog to investigate the findings further, although a number of scientists questioned the study's basic methods and Monsanto said it felt confident its products had been proven safe.
Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen and colleagues said rats fed on a diet containing NK603 - a seed variety made tolerant to dousings of Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller - or given water with Roundup at levels permitted in the United States, died earlier than those on a standard diet.
Experts not involved in the study were sceptical, with one accusing the French scientists of going on a "statistical fishing trip" and others describing its methods as well below standard.
The animals on the genetically modified (GM) diet suffered mammary tumours, as well as severe liver and kidney damage, according to the peer-reviewed study which was published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology and presented at a news conference in London.
The researchers said 50 percent of male and 70 percent of female rats died prematurely, compared with only 30 percent and 20 percent in the control group.
Monsanto spokesman Thomas Helscher said the company would review the study thoroughly. However, he added: "Numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies performed on biotech crops to date, including more than a hundred feeding studies, have continuously confirmed their safety, as reflected in the respective safety assessments by regulatory authorities around the world."
EXPERTS SCEPTICAL
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are deeply unpopular in Europe but dominate major crops in the United States after Monsanto introduced a soybean genetically altered to tolerate Roundup in 1996.
Experts asked by reporters to review the scientific paper advised caution in drawing conclusions from it.
Tom Sanders, head of the nutritional sciences research division at King's College London, noted that Seralini's team had not provided any data on how much the rats were given to eat, or what their growth rates were.
"This strain of rat is very prone to mammary tumours particularly when food intake is not restricted," he said. "The statistical methods are unconventional ... and it would appear the authors have gone on a statistical fishing trip."
Mark Tester, a research professor at the Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics at the University of Adelaide, said the study's findings raised the question of why no previous studies have flagged up similar concerns.
"If the effects are as big as purported, and if the work really is relevant to humans, why aren't the North Americans dropping like flies? GM has been in the food chain for over a decade over there - and longevity continues to increase inexorably," he said in an emailed comment.
David Spiegelhalter of the University of Cambridge said the methods, statistics and reporting of results were all below standard. He added that the study's untreated control arm comprised only 10 rats of each sex, most of which also got tumours.
LONG-TERM EFFECTS?
While supporters of GM crops say previous studies have overwhelmingly pointed to their safety, critics argue there is still limited information about the long-term effects since the crops have only been around for just over 15 years.
In France, where opposition to GMOs has led to a ban on growing such crops, the government said it had asked its health and safety agency to assess the study and had also sent it to the European Union's food safety agency (EFSA).
"Based on the conclusion ..., the government will ask the European authorities to take all necessary measures to protect human and animal health, measures that could go as far as an emergency suspension of imports of NK603 maize in the European Union," the French health, environment and farm ministries said in a joint statement.
Seralini, the scientist at the centre of the latest research, previously raised safety concerns based on a shorter rat study in 2009. His new study takes things a step further by tracking the animals throughout their two-year lifespan.
Michael Antoniou, a molecular biologist at King's College London, who helped draft the paper, told reporters at a London briefing that its findings highlighted the "need to test all GM crops in two-year lifelong studies".
"I feel this data is strong enough to withdraw the marketing approval for this variety of GM maize temporarily, until this study is followed up and repeated with larger number of animals to get the full statistical power that we want," he said.
Seralini believes his latest lifetime rat tests give a more realistic and authoritative view of risks than the 90-day feeding trials that form the basis of GM crop approvals, since three months is only the equivalent of early adulthood in rats.
France's Jose Bove, vice-chairman of the European Parliament's commission for agriculture and known as an opponent of GM, called for an immediate suspension of all EU cultivation and import authorisations of GM crops. "This study finally shows we are right and that it is urgent to quickly review all GMO evaluation processes," he said in a statement.
The study is also likely to create friction in the United States, where opponents of genetically engineered foods in California are fighting to have all GMOs removed from the food supply.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/gmcrops-safety-idUSL5E8KJC1220120919
UPDATE 3-Study on Monsanto GM corn concerns draws scepticism
Wed Sep 19, 2012 12:56pm EDT
* Paris asks health body to investigate French study findings
* But external experts strongly critical of study methods
* French scientist has led previous research critical of GM
* GM crops unpopular in Europe but widely used in U.S.
By Ben Hirschler and Kate Kelland
LONDON, Sept 19 (Reuters) - In a study that prompted sharp criticism from other experts, French scientists said on Wednesday that rats fed on Monsanto's genetically modified corn or exposed to its top-selling weedkiller suffered tumours and multiple organ damage.
The French government asked the country's health watchdog to investigate the findings further, although a number of scientists questioned the study's basic methods and Monsanto said it felt confident its products had been proven safe.
Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen and colleagues said rats fed on a diet containing NK603 - a seed variety made tolerant to dousings of Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller - or given water with Roundup at levels permitted in the United States, died earlier than those on a standard diet.
Experts not involved in the study were sceptical, with one accusing the French scientists of going on a "statistical fishing trip" and others describing its methods as well below standard.
The animals on the genetically modified (GM) diet suffered mammary tumours, as well as severe liver and kidney damage, according to the peer-reviewed study which was published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology and presented at a news conference in London.
The researchers said 50 percent of male and 70 percent of female rats died prematurely, compared with only 30 percent and 20 percent in the control group.
Monsanto spokesman Thomas Helscher said the company would review the study thoroughly. However, he added: "Numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies performed on biotech crops to date, including more than a hundred feeding studies, have continuously confirmed their safety, as reflected in the respective safety assessments by regulatory authorities around the world."
EXPERTS SCEPTICAL
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are deeply unpopular in Europe but dominate major crops in the United States after Monsanto introduced a soybean genetically altered to tolerate Roundup in 1996.
Experts asked by reporters to review the scientific paper advised caution in drawing conclusions from it.
Tom Sanders, head of the nutritional sciences research division at King's College London, noted that Seralini's team had not provided any data on how much the rats were given to eat, or what their growth rates were.
"This strain of rat is very prone to mammary tumours particularly when food intake is not restricted," he said. "The statistical methods are unconventional ... and it would appear the authors have gone on a statistical fishing trip."
Mark Tester, a research professor at the Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics at the University of Adelaide, said the study's findings raised the question of why no previous studies have flagged up similar concerns.
"If the effects are as big as purported, and if the work really is relevant to humans, why aren't the North Americans dropping like flies? GM has been in the food chain for over a decade over there - and longevity continues to increase inexorably," he said in an emailed comment.
David Spiegelhalter of the University of Cambridge said the methods, statistics and reporting of results were all below standard. He added that the study's untreated control arm comprised only 10 rats of each sex, most of which also got tumours.
LONG-TERM EFFECTS?
While supporters of GM crops say previous studies have overwhelmingly pointed to their safety, critics argue there is still limited information about the long-term effects since the crops have only been around for just over 15 years.
In France, where opposition to GMOs has led to a ban on growing such crops, the government said it had asked its health and safety agency to assess the study and had also sent it to the European Union's food safety agency (EFSA).
"Based on the conclusion ..., the government will ask the European authorities to take all necessary measures to protect human and animal health, measures that could go as far as an emergency suspension of imports of NK603 maize in the European Union," the French health, environment and farm ministries said in a joint statement.
Seralini, the scientist at the centre of the latest research, previously raised safety concerns based on a shorter rat study in 2009. His new study takes things a step further by tracking the animals throughout their two-year lifespan.
Michael Antoniou, a molecular biologist at King's College London, who helped draft the paper, told reporters at a London briefing that its findings highlighted the "need to test all GM crops in two-year lifelong studies".
"I feel this data is strong enough to withdraw the marketing approval for this variety of GM maize temporarily, until this study is followed up and repeated with larger number of animals to get the full statistical power that we want," he said.
Seralini believes his latest lifetime rat tests give a more realistic and authoritative view of risks than the 90-day feeding trials that form the basis of GM crop approvals, since three months is only the equivalent of early adulthood in rats.
France's Jose Bove, vice-chairman of the European Parliament's commission for agriculture and known as an opponent of GM, called for an immediate suspension of all EU cultivation and import authorisations of GM crops. "This study finally shows we are right and that it is urgent to quickly review all GMO evaluation processes," he said in a statement.
The study is also likely to create friction in the United States, where opponents of genetically engineered foods in California are fighting to have all GMOs removed from the food supply.
Here is the study abstract. This appears to be all technical; for scientists only.
http://www.biolsci.org/v05p0706.htm
de Vendômois JS, Roullier F, Cellier D, Séralini GE.
A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health.
Int J Biol Sci 2009; 5(7):706-726. Available from http://www.biolsci.org/v05p0706.htm
http://www.biolsci.org/v05p0706.htm
de Vendômois JS, Roullier F, Cellier D, Séralini GE.
A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health.
Int J Biol Sci 2009; 5(7):706-726. Available from http://www.biolsci.org/v05p0706.htm
Last edited:
Here is a telebriefing video with one of the scientists (it appears to be an audio conference with still photos):
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/333204
By Anne Sewell
Sep 20, 2012
Paris - The results of a two-year feeding trial were released yesterday, with details of tumors and mortality in rats, and a telebriefing conference was held which has now been released as an audio file.
As reported in Digital Journal yesterday, this is the first study of its kind, it is peer-reviewed, and was published in the American journal, Food and Chemical Toxicology.
The animal feeding trial was set up to study the lifetime effects of exposure to NK603 Roundup tolerant GM maize, and also to Roundup, the world's best-selling herbicide and weedkiller.
First peer reviewed lifetime feeding trial finds “safe” levels of GM maize and Roundup can cause tumors and multiple organ damage.
Researchers found that rats fed on a diet containing NK603 Roundup tolerant GM maize, or given water containing Roundup at levels permitted in drinking water and GM crops in the US, died earlier than rats fed on a standard diet. They suffered mammary tumors and severe liver and kidney damage.
The research was lead by Professor Gilles-Eric Séralini, Molecular Biologist at Caen University and first author of the research being discussed.
The telebriefing is introduced by Patrick Holden, Founder and Director for the Sustainable Food Trust. SFT has an interest in comparing different systems of agriculture and their impact on human and environmental health.
Professor Gilles-Eric Séralini then speaks at length about the feeding trial.
Additional contributors at the telepress conference held on Wednesday, include Dr. Michael Antoniou – Professor in Molecular Genetics, Kings College, London School of Medicine. Dr. Antoniou has over 40 peer-reviewed publications of original work.
Dr Antoniou says, “This is the most thorough research ever published into the health effects of GM food crops and the herbicide Roundup on rats. It shows an extraordinary number of tumors developing earlier and more aggressively - particularly in female animals. I am shocked by the extreme negative health impacts.”
“The rat has long been used as a surrogate for human toxicity. All new pharmaceutical, agricultural and household substances are, prior to their approval, tested on rats. This is as good an indicator as we can expect that the consumption of GM maize and the herbicide Roundup, impacts seriously on human health.”
The research team say they believe this is the first long-term animal feeding trial to examine the effects of Roundup, the world’s most used herbicide, and a commercial Roundup tolerant GM maize. Researchers studied 10 groups, each containing 10 male and 10 female rats, over their normal lifetime - two years.
Details of the trial are as follows:
Three groups were given Roundup in their drinking water, at three different levels consistent with exposure through the food chain from crops sprayed with the weedkiller: the mid level corresponded to the maximum level permitted in the US in some GM feed; the lowest corresponded to contamination found in some tap waters. Three groups were fed diets which contained different proportions of NK603 – 11%, 22% and 33%. Three groups were given both Roundup and NK603 at the same three dosages. The final control group was fed an equivalent diet with no Roundup or NK603 but containing 33% of equivalent non-GM maize.
Researchers found that NK603 and Roundup both caused similar damage to the rats’ health whether they were consumed on their own or together. Females developed fatal mammary tumors and pituitary disorders. Males suffered liver damage, developed kidney and skin tumors and experienced problems with their digestive system. The team also identified a “threshold effect” where even the lowest doses were associated with severe health problems.
The report states: “Similar degrees of pathological symptoms were noticed in this study to occur from the lowest to the highest doses suggesting a threshold effect. This corresponds to levels likely to arise from consumption or environmental exposure, such as either 11% GM maize in food, or 50ng/L of glyphosate in R-formulation [the lowest concentration of Roundup in the rats’ drinking water] as can be found in some contaminated drinking tap waters, and which falls within authorized limits.”
Copies of the research can be obtained on request from CRIIGEN and from Food and Chemical Toxicology.
The full report, as published in Food and Chemical Toxicology, can be read here. http://research.sustainablefoodtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Final-Paper.pdf
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/333204
By Anne Sewell
Sep 20, 2012
Paris - The results of a two-year feeding trial were released yesterday, with details of tumors and mortality in rats, and a telebriefing conference was held which has now been released as an audio file.
As reported in Digital Journal yesterday, this is the first study of its kind, it is peer-reviewed, and was published in the American journal, Food and Chemical Toxicology.
The animal feeding trial was set up to study the lifetime effects of exposure to NK603 Roundup tolerant GM maize, and also to Roundup, the world's best-selling herbicide and weedkiller.
First peer reviewed lifetime feeding trial finds “safe” levels of GM maize and Roundup can cause tumors and multiple organ damage.
Researchers found that rats fed on a diet containing NK603 Roundup tolerant GM maize, or given water containing Roundup at levels permitted in drinking water and GM crops in the US, died earlier than rats fed on a standard diet. They suffered mammary tumors and severe liver and kidney damage.
The research was lead by Professor Gilles-Eric Séralini, Molecular Biologist at Caen University and first author of the research being discussed.
The telebriefing is introduced by Patrick Holden, Founder and Director for the Sustainable Food Trust. SFT has an interest in comparing different systems of agriculture and their impact on human and environmental health.
Professor Gilles-Eric Séralini then speaks at length about the feeding trial.
Additional contributors at the telepress conference held on Wednesday, include Dr. Michael Antoniou – Professor in Molecular Genetics, Kings College, London School of Medicine. Dr. Antoniou has over 40 peer-reviewed publications of original work.
Dr Antoniou says, “This is the most thorough research ever published into the health effects of GM food crops and the herbicide Roundup on rats. It shows an extraordinary number of tumors developing earlier and more aggressively - particularly in female animals. I am shocked by the extreme negative health impacts.”
“The rat has long been used as a surrogate for human toxicity. All new pharmaceutical, agricultural and household substances are, prior to their approval, tested on rats. This is as good an indicator as we can expect that the consumption of GM maize and the herbicide Roundup, impacts seriously on human health.”
The research team say they believe this is the first long-term animal feeding trial to examine the effects of Roundup, the world’s most used herbicide, and a commercial Roundup tolerant GM maize. Researchers studied 10 groups, each containing 10 male and 10 female rats, over their normal lifetime - two years.
Details of the trial are as follows:
Three groups were given Roundup in their drinking water, at three different levels consistent with exposure through the food chain from crops sprayed with the weedkiller: the mid level corresponded to the maximum level permitted in the US in some GM feed; the lowest corresponded to contamination found in some tap waters. Three groups were fed diets which contained different proportions of NK603 – 11%, 22% and 33%. Three groups were given both Roundup and NK603 at the same three dosages. The final control group was fed an equivalent diet with no Roundup or NK603 but containing 33% of equivalent non-GM maize.
Researchers found that NK603 and Roundup both caused similar damage to the rats’ health whether they were consumed on their own or together. Females developed fatal mammary tumors and pituitary disorders. Males suffered liver damage, developed kidney and skin tumors and experienced problems with their digestive system. The team also identified a “threshold effect” where even the lowest doses were associated with severe health problems.
The report states: “Similar degrees of pathological symptoms were noticed in this study to occur from the lowest to the highest doses suggesting a threshold effect. This corresponds to levels likely to arise from consumption or environmental exposure, such as either 11% GM maize in food, or 50ng/L of glyphosate in R-formulation [the lowest concentration of Roundup in the rats’ drinking water] as can be found in some contaminated drinking tap waters, and which falls within authorized limits.”
Copies of the research can be obtained on request from CRIIGEN and from Food and Chemical Toxicology.
The full report, as published in Food and Chemical Toxicology, can be read here. http://research.sustainablefoodtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Final-Paper.pdf
Vicki
Girls With Guns Member
http://www.nationofchange.org/top-10-gmo-foods-avoid-1343568178
Top 10 Worst GMO Foods for Your GMO Foods List
1. Corn: This is a no-brainer. If you’ve watched any food documentary, you know corn is highly modified. “As many as half of all U.S. farms growing corn for Monsanto are using genetically modified corn,” and much of it is intended for human consumption. Monsanto’s GMO corn has been tied to numerous health issues, including weight gain and organ disruption.
2. Soy: Found in tofu, vegetarian products, soybean oil, soy flour, and numerous other products, soy is also modified to resist herbicides. As of now, biotech giant Monsanto still has a tight grasp on the soybean market, with approximately 90 percent of soy being genetically engineered to resist Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup. In one single year, 2006, 96.7 million pounds of glyphosate was sprayed on soybeans alone
3. Sugar: According to NaturalNews, genetically-modified sugar beets were introduced to the U.S. market in 2009. Like others, they’ve been modified by Monsanto to resist herbicides. Monsanto has even had USDA and court-related issues with the planting of its sugar beets, being ordered to remove seeds from the soil due to illegal approval.
NationofChange is a 501(c)3 nonprofit funded directly by our readers. Please make a small donation to support our work.
4. Aspartame: Aspartame is a toxic additive used in numerous food products, and should be avoided for numerous reasons, including the fact that it is created with genetically modified bacteria.
5. Papayas: This one may come as a surprise to all of you tropical-fruit lovers. GMO papayas have been grown in Hawaii for consumption since 1999. Though they can’t be sold to countries in the European Union, they are welcome with open arms in the U.S. and Canada.
6. Canola: One of the most chemically altered foods in the U.S. diet, canola oil is obtained from rapeseed through a series of chemical actions.
7. Cotton: Found in cotton oil, cotton originating in India and China in particular has serious risks.
8. Dairy: Your dairy products contain growth hormones, with as many as one-fifth of all dairy cows in America are pumped with these hormones. In fact, Monsanto’s health-hazardous rBGH has been banned in 27 countries, but is still in most US cows. If you must drink milk, buy organic.
9. and 10. Zucchini and Yellow Squash: Closely related, these two squash varieties are modified to resist viruses.
The dangers of some of these foods are well-known. The Bt toxin being used in GMO corn, for example, was recently detected in the blood of pregnant women and their babies. But perhaps more frightening are the risks that are still unknown.
With little regulation and safety tests performed by the companies doing the genetic modifications themselves, we have no way of knowing for certain what risks these lab-created foods pose to us outside of what we already know.
The best advice: steer clear of them altogether.
Top 10 Worst GMO Foods for Your GMO Foods List
1. Corn: This is a no-brainer. If you’ve watched any food documentary, you know corn is highly modified. “As many as half of all U.S. farms growing corn for Monsanto are using genetically modified corn,” and much of it is intended for human consumption. Monsanto’s GMO corn has been tied to numerous health issues, including weight gain and organ disruption.
2. Soy: Found in tofu, vegetarian products, soybean oil, soy flour, and numerous other products, soy is also modified to resist herbicides. As of now, biotech giant Monsanto still has a tight grasp on the soybean market, with approximately 90 percent of soy being genetically engineered to resist Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup. In one single year, 2006, 96.7 million pounds of glyphosate was sprayed on soybeans alone
3. Sugar: According to NaturalNews, genetically-modified sugar beets were introduced to the U.S. market in 2009. Like others, they’ve been modified by Monsanto to resist herbicides. Monsanto has even had USDA and court-related issues with the planting of its sugar beets, being ordered to remove seeds from the soil due to illegal approval.
NationofChange is a 501(c)3 nonprofit funded directly by our readers. Please make a small donation to support our work.
4. Aspartame: Aspartame is a toxic additive used in numerous food products, and should be avoided for numerous reasons, including the fact that it is created with genetically modified bacteria.
5. Papayas: This one may come as a surprise to all of you tropical-fruit lovers. GMO papayas have been grown in Hawaii for consumption since 1999. Though they can’t be sold to countries in the European Union, they are welcome with open arms in the U.S. and Canada.
6. Canola: One of the most chemically altered foods in the U.S. diet, canola oil is obtained from rapeseed through a series of chemical actions.
7. Cotton: Found in cotton oil, cotton originating in India and China in particular has serious risks.
8. Dairy: Your dairy products contain growth hormones, with as many as one-fifth of all dairy cows in America are pumped with these hormones. In fact, Monsanto’s health-hazardous rBGH has been banned in 27 countries, but is still in most US cows. If you must drink milk, buy organic.
9. and 10. Zucchini and Yellow Squash: Closely related, these two squash varieties are modified to resist viruses.
The dangers of some of these foods are well-known. The Bt toxin being used in GMO corn, for example, was recently detected in the blood of pregnant women and their babies. But perhaps more frightening are the risks that are still unknown.
With little regulation and safety tests performed by the companies doing the genetic modifications themselves, we have no way of knowing for certain what risks these lab-created foods pose to us outside of what we already know.
The best advice: steer clear of them altogether.
Vicki
Girls With Guns Member
Which Countries Have Banned GMO Foods?
GMO foods, or genetically modified foods, are crops, animals and other food products that have had their genes changed to create breeds and strains of plants and animals that do not naturally occur. While many countries have adopted GMO foods, others have banned the production and selling of GMO foods and created guidelines that demand GMO foods be labeled. Does this Spark an idea?
Africa
In Africa, both Algeria and Egypt have laws restricting GMO foods. In Algeria, both the planting and distribution of GMO foods is illegal, while in Egypt, GMO foods must be approved before they can be distributed.
Asia
In Asia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, China, Japan and the Philippines all have laws limiting GMO foods. Both Sri Lanka and Thailand had bans on imported GMOs as early as 2001, while the rest of the countries have had more recent bans.
Europe
In Europe, Norway, Austria, Germany, the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, Greece, France, Luxembourg and Portugal have put in place GMO restrictions. France made an important step in the no-GMO movement by specifically defining exactly what "GMO-free" means when it comes to food labeling. Ireland has banned all growing and cultivating of GMO foods and the European Union -- a governing coalition of European countries -- has considered a Europe-wide banning of GMO foods.
The Middle East
In the Middle East, Saudi Arabia has banned the growing of GMO foods and the importing of GMO wheat.
The Americas
While the United States still largely allows for the growth and import of GMO foods and does not demand food labeling, South American countries such as Brazil and Paraguay have restrictions on GMO foods.
http://www.ehow.com/info_8527757_countries-banned-gmo-foods.html
GMO foods, or genetically modified foods, are crops, animals and other food products that have had their genes changed to create breeds and strains of plants and animals that do not naturally occur. While many countries have adopted GMO foods, others have banned the production and selling of GMO foods and created guidelines that demand GMO foods be labeled. Does this Spark an idea?
Africa
In Africa, both Algeria and Egypt have laws restricting GMO foods. In Algeria, both the planting and distribution of GMO foods is illegal, while in Egypt, GMO foods must be approved before they can be distributed.
Asia
In Asia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, China, Japan and the Philippines all have laws limiting GMO foods. Both Sri Lanka and Thailand had bans on imported GMOs as early as 2001, while the rest of the countries have had more recent bans.
Europe
In Europe, Norway, Austria, Germany, the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, Greece, France, Luxembourg and Portugal have put in place GMO restrictions. France made an important step in the no-GMO movement by specifically defining exactly what "GMO-free" means when it comes to food labeling. Ireland has banned all growing and cultivating of GMO foods and the European Union -- a governing coalition of European countries -- has considered a Europe-wide banning of GMO foods.
The Middle East
In the Middle East, Saudi Arabia has banned the growing of GMO foods and the importing of GMO wheat.
The Americas
While the United States still largely allows for the growth and import of GMO foods and does not demand food labeling, South American countries such as Brazil and Paraguay have restrictions on GMO foods.
http://www.ehow.com/info_8527757_countries-banned-gmo-foods.html
Here's a video of actual work in the lab, plus interviews with the scientists.
WARNING: Video contains 'gross' images of the rats, post mortems and tumors.
I just started watching this, but they stated that they had to be secretive about the study because Monsanto requires that seeds purchased not be used for studies, or, that the scientists get their permission first (can't have results making Monsanto look bad....)
GROSS IMAGE BELOW!
WARNING: Video contains 'gross' images of the rats, post mortems and tumors.
I just started watching this, but they stated that they had to be secretive about the study because Monsanto requires that seeds purchased not be used for studies, or, that the scientists get their permission first (can't have results making Monsanto look bad....)
GROSS IMAGE BELOW!
Vicki
Girls With Guns Member
Intestinal Cleansing From GMO Foods
By Robin Hale, eHow Contributor
http://www.ehow.com/way_5502997_intestinal-cleansing-gmo-foods.html
On May 19 of 2009, an official warning was issued by the American Academy of of environmental medicine (AAEM) in regard to GMO (genetically modified organism) foods. The warning stated that all GMO foods should be avoided whenever possible, as multiple animal studies have shown them to have a direct association with severe health risks, including infertility, immune problems, major organ changes, accelerated aging and insulin regulation problems.
Foods To Avoid
The first step for any intestinal cleanse requires cutting out the foods that are causing the problem. Foods affected by GMO include transgenic plant products such as corn, soybean, canola, and cotton seed oil. Cut these foods from your diet immediately unless the packaging clearly states, "Non-GMO."
Herbal Detox for Intestinal Cleansing
For your body to function properly, all the toxins built up from GMO foods must be cleared from your system. Herbal detoxification is a powerful way to remove these undesirable toxins. There are a variety of herbs that are very effective for GMO detox.
Psyllium seed effectively facilitates the elimination of accumulated toxins while simultaneously promoting healthy bowel movements. Soaking the psyllium seeds in water will cause them to swell and take on a jellylike nature. Once ingested, the seeds go to work like a sponge, absorbing unwanted toxins.
Cascara sagrada will quickly rid your body of toxins. Acting as a laxative, it also strengthens the colon. This herb is perfectly safe, even with prolonged use. Cascara sagrada can be used along with psyllium seed.
Burdock seeds act as a type of diuretic and are powerful enough to rid your body of every type of toxin, including heavy metals. For a total cleanse from GMO and pesticides, this herb will do the job.
Dandelion root will help finish the detoxification process. Best known for its ability to cleanse the liver, dandelion root will also remove the gallbladder waste and cleanse the kidneys.
Cleansing Fast for Intestinal Cleansing
Another option for ridding your intestine and colon of unwanted buildup and toxins is a cleansing fast. When beginning a fast, plan to eat lightly before you begin.
There are several different types of fasts that work well. Those that include grapefruits, lemon, organic apple juice and herbal teas work best. The grapefruit, lemon and apple juice work to speed along the cleansing process.
Break your fast slowly, over a period of several hours. First, add carrots or oranges to your liquid diet. Wait a few hours and then add some raw vegetables and simple grains. Going into or coming off of a fast too quickly can be overly taxing on your system.
Once you have rid your body of the dangers associated with GMO foods, it is wise to read labels carefully and stay away from them completely. The risk factor of these foods is too high and there are plenty of other healthy and safe foods to choose from.
By Robin Hale, eHow Contributor
http://www.ehow.com/way_5502997_intestinal-cleansing-gmo-foods.html
On May 19 of 2009, an official warning was issued by the American Academy of of environmental medicine (AAEM) in regard to GMO (genetically modified organism) foods. The warning stated that all GMO foods should be avoided whenever possible, as multiple animal studies have shown them to have a direct association with severe health risks, including infertility, immune problems, major organ changes, accelerated aging and insulin regulation problems.
Foods To Avoid
The first step for any intestinal cleanse requires cutting out the foods that are causing the problem. Foods affected by GMO include transgenic plant products such as corn, soybean, canola, and cotton seed oil. Cut these foods from your diet immediately unless the packaging clearly states, "Non-GMO."
Herbal Detox for Intestinal Cleansing
For your body to function properly, all the toxins built up from GMO foods must be cleared from your system. Herbal detoxification is a powerful way to remove these undesirable toxins. There are a variety of herbs that are very effective for GMO detox.
Psyllium seed effectively facilitates the elimination of accumulated toxins while simultaneously promoting healthy bowel movements. Soaking the psyllium seeds in water will cause them to swell and take on a jellylike nature. Once ingested, the seeds go to work like a sponge, absorbing unwanted toxins.
Cascara sagrada will quickly rid your body of toxins. Acting as a laxative, it also strengthens the colon. This herb is perfectly safe, even with prolonged use. Cascara sagrada can be used along with psyllium seed.
Burdock seeds act as a type of diuretic and are powerful enough to rid your body of every type of toxin, including heavy metals. For a total cleanse from GMO and pesticides, this herb will do the job.
Dandelion root will help finish the detoxification process. Best known for its ability to cleanse the liver, dandelion root will also remove the gallbladder waste and cleanse the kidneys.
Cleansing Fast for Intestinal Cleansing
Another option for ridding your intestine and colon of unwanted buildup and toxins is a cleansing fast. When beginning a fast, plan to eat lightly before you begin.
There are several different types of fasts that work well. Those that include grapefruits, lemon, organic apple juice and herbal teas work best. The grapefruit, lemon and apple juice work to speed along the cleansing process.
Break your fast slowly, over a period of several hours. First, add carrots or oranges to your liquid diet. Wait a few hours and then add some raw vegetables and simple grains. Going into or coming off of a fast too quickly can be overly taxing on your system.
Once you have rid your body of the dangers associated with GMO foods, it is wise to read labels carefully and stay away from them completely. The risk factor of these foods is too high and there are plenty of other healthy and safe foods to choose from.
Flippper
Time Traveler
I understand that popcorn is not GMO (yet), nor is Cane Sugar. I knew zucchini and crookneck squash were, but wonder what percentage. My dad had a crookneck squash that put out so much squash it was bizarre. Makes me wonder if it was one such-it did finally get some mildew bug that killed it.
I've run into so many people who have intestinal issues, crohn's or diverticulitis, and stomach ailments, but mostly lower GI-even young kids. Secretary at Dr. Mark Starr's office in Phoenix area told me her bf has crohn's and is taking a mushroom complex that immediately helped his condition. Apparently he had been quite bad and is in his early 20's. She told me a few weeks ago that he hasn't had a flare up or bout since I was at the office in July, so maybe it helps clear out the GMO damage?
I've been wondering about cotton-I try to wear natural fibers, and have considered that the cotton we have is damaging, a lady in a fabric shop told me almost all their bolts of cotton come from India, some from China, very little domestic source cotton which is ridiculous but it would likely be GM anyway, so no loss.
I've run into so many people who have intestinal issues, crohn's or diverticulitis, and stomach ailments, but mostly lower GI-even young kids. Secretary at Dr. Mark Starr's office in Phoenix area told me her bf has crohn's and is taking a mushroom complex that immediately helped his condition. Apparently he had been quite bad and is in his early 20's. She told me a few weeks ago that he hasn't had a flare up or bout since I was at the office in July, so maybe it helps clear out the GMO damage?
I've been wondering about cotton-I try to wear natural fibers, and have considered that the cotton we have is damaging, a lady in a fabric shop told me almost all their bolts of cotton come from India, some from China, very little domestic source cotton which is ridiculous but it would likely be GM anyway, so no loss.
Vicki
Girls With Guns Member
I'd be interested in what mushroom complex that was Flippper. One of my oldest son's best buds has Crohns, he's a bout 28 and the last time I saw him he was so skinny that he looked like death warmed over. I told my son we should do a research report for him but have yet to sit down and do it. You're post reminded me though so I'll mention it tomorrow. Thanks!
Vicki
Vicki
Girls With Guns Member
I've been growing heritage non-GMO since about 99'
I avoided eating out until this last year or so. Friends have me going out regularly now but I'm thinking that needs to stop. I just don't trust the food anymore cept my own. Bummer!
Great thread and great information.
I've used Cascara sagrada 'liquid' since 1989.
I won't drift the thread with 'Kifer' (pro-biotic drink) but I will say there is good info on the Hysterectomy Thread started by BarryNos(?) which has info for the 'Gut' if you don't mind wading through the 'Muck' we tolerated as of late.
If the gut isn't healthy the brain gets fogged/sick and then all kinds of disease begins to try an enter our bodies through out intestines.
Monsanto (Man/Satan) is one evil corporation destined to wipe out humanity at all cost.
Rumsfeld and co./Gates Foundation,etc. are seeing the depopulation plan through at 'Full Throttle'.
Again, good thread.
Peace and Blessing's,
MCA
It may be Kombucha mushroom + beta Glucans Vicki.
Ima go find out.
~MCA
Here is one site with great info,as I keep digging into miles.
http://www.getkombucha.com/ ****No Mention of Beta Glucans on this site..
http://organic-kombucha.com/teakombucha2.html >>> Good Site
*Fair Use*
LeViolinist
Veteran Member
Flipper,
we wrote the Orville R company, inquiring about their GOURMET popcorn and they sent an email answering that they DO use perfectly safe GMO corn.
Now we are buying popcorn online from Amish Country. amishcountrypopcorn.com
LeV
we wrote the Orville R company, inquiring about their GOURMET popcorn and they sent an email answering that they DO use perfectly safe GMO corn.
Now we are buying popcorn online from Amish Country. amishcountrypopcorn.com
LeV
Kent
Inactive
Peer reviewed, peer rejected. This same study was posted here several times before. It was done THREE years ago and has been dis-proven.
http://www.agbioworld.org/newsletter_wm/index.php?caseid=archive&newsid=2945
I have concerns about cotton as well. If GMO cotton is used in our clothing how would that affect us? We breath a certain amount of the fibers from our cloths.
I consider myself to be very healthy. However I have noticed my ear canals have been getting flaky skin just at the opening where you rub a q-tip to clean after showering. This has been going on for a long time. It is not a big issue and does not appear to be a major problem. The first thing that came to mind when I noticed it was is this from GMO cotton in my q-tips?
Kent
Inactive
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/sci...s/factsheets2009/fsanzresponsetoseral4647.cfm
FSANZ response to de Vendomois et al. (2009), A comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health, Int. J. Biol. Sci. 5 (7): 706-726
Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ)
ISSUE
Reports in the media refer to a newly published paper in the International Journal of Biological Sciences (December 2009) by Séralini and colleagues in which the authors claim to have identified adverse effects in rats fed GM corn using statistical analysis. Whereas a similar paper published in 2007 focused on MON863 corn, this paper applies the same statistical methodology to data from separate feeding studies for GM corn lines MON863, MON810 and NK603.
RESPONSE
In their latest paper, Séralini and colleagues again use a statistical analysis approach to interpret data from animal toxicity studies. On this occasion, they apply their methodology to separate feeding studies in rats with GM corn lines MON863, MON810 and NK603, and claim that their analysis has identified “new side effects linked with GM maize consumption, which were sex- and often dose-dependent”.
The authors claim that their results show “signs of toxicity” mostly associated with the kidney and liver, although other effects were reported to have been identified in heart, adrenal glands, spleen and haematopoietic system. Based on their reported findings, the authors argue strongly that longer-term (up to 2 years) feeding experiments are necessary in at least three animal species forin vivosafety evaluation of GM foods.
In response to Séralini’s 2007 paper, an expert scientific panel dismissed similar claims made by these authors. FSANZ also independently investigated the material presented in the paper and concluded that the incidence of statistically significant differences in animals fed GM corn (MON863) is entirely consistent with normal background variability.
In their most recent paper, Séralini and colleagues reject the consensus view and instead propose a cause-and-effect link between the findings and the new pesticides (herbicide or insecticide) specific to each GM corn, or associate the results with unintended effects arising from the genetic modification process itself. The authors do not offer any plausible scientific explanations for their hypothesis, nor do they consider the lack of concordance of the statistics with other investigative processes used in the studies such as pathology, histopathology and histochemistry.
Séralini and colleagues have distorted the toxicological significance of their results by placing undue emphasis on the statistical treatment of data, and failing to take other relevant factors into account. Reliance solely on statistics to determine treatment related effects in such studies is not indicative of a robust toxicological analysis. There is no corroborating evidence that would lead independently to the conclusion that there were effects of toxicological significance. FSANZ remains confident that the changes reported in these studies are neither sex- nor dose-related and are primarily due to chance alone.
Background
Séralini and colleagues have now published several papers reporting on feeding studies with GM foods. In June 2009, Séralini and colleagues repeated claims made in an earlier article (Séraliniet al., 2007) that a statistical re-analysis of the toxicity data originally reported by Hammondet al., 2006 provided evidence of hepatorenal effects in rats fed GM maize for three months. No new data were presented in the article. Instead, the authors commented on a published report by an expert panel (Doullet al., 2007) that discussed the risk assessment conducted by Séraliniet al. 2007. For reasons not stated, the authors did not address the numerous deficiencies of their statistical re-analysis that had been reported by several international regulatory agencies (FSANZ 2007; EFSA 2007a; EFSA 2007 b; Monod 2007). Instead, they chose to focus on the issues raised in a later published report by Doull et al., 2007. In the absence of new data and the failure of the authors to acknowledge that the interpretation of toxicity studies does not only involve statistics but requires the need for biological context, FSANZ is of the opinion that the recent article from Séraliniet al. provides no grounds to revise its previous conclusions on the safety of food derived from MON 863 corn. The FSANZ assessment concluded that food derived from MON 863 corn is as safe and wholesome as food derived from other commercial corn varieties.
References
Doull J, Gaylor D, Greim HA, Lovell DP, Lynch B, Munro IC. Report of an expert panel on the reanalysis by Séralini et al. (2007) of a 90-day study conducted by Monsanto in support of the safety of a genetically modified corn variety (MON 863).Food Chem Toxicol2007;45:2073-2085.
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (2007a). Statement of the Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms on the analysis of data from a 90-day rat feeding study with MON 863 maize. Adopted 25 June 2007. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/cs/BlobServer/Statement/GMO_statement_MON863.pdf?ssbinary=true
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (2007b). EFSA review of statistical analyses conducted for the assessment of the MON 863 90-day rat feeding study. 28 June 2007. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/GMO_statement_MON863.pdf?ssbinary=true
FSANZ. Review of the report by Séraliniet al., (2007): “New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity”. Food Standards Australia New Zealand July 2007. http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/Review_of_Report_by_Seralini_et_al_July_2007.doc
Hammond B, Lemen J, Dudek R, Ward D, Jiang C, Nemeth M, Burns J. Results of a 90-day safety assurance study with rats fed grain from corn rootworm-protected corn.Food Chem Toxicol2006;44:147-160.
Monod H., 2007. Expérience sur rats menée par Monsanto en 2001-2002 avec certains régimes comportant du maïs génétiquement modifié: analyse statistique des courbes d’évolution du poids. Study conducted upon request of the CGB (Commission du Génie Moléculaire, France).
http://www.ogm.gouv.fr/experimentations/evaluation_scientifique/cgb/autres_avis/Avis_CGB_MON 863_15juin2007.pdf
Séralini G-E, Cellier D, de Vendomois JS. New analysis of a rat feeding study with genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity.Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 2007; 52:596-602.
Séralini G-E, de Vendomois JS, Cellier D, Sultan C, Buiatti M, Gallagher L, Antoniou M, Dronamraju KR. How subchronic and chronic health effects can be neglected for GMOs, pesticides or chemicals.Int J Biol Sci 2009;5:438-443.
de Vendomois J, Roullier F, Cellier D and Séralini G-E, A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health.Int J Biol Sci2009;5(7):706-726.
FSANZ response to de Vendomois et al. (2009), A comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health, Int. J. Biol. Sci. 5 (7): 706-726
Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ)
ISSUE
Reports in the media refer to a newly published paper in the International Journal of Biological Sciences (December 2009) by Séralini and colleagues in which the authors claim to have identified adverse effects in rats fed GM corn using statistical analysis. Whereas a similar paper published in 2007 focused on MON863 corn, this paper applies the same statistical methodology to data from separate feeding studies for GM corn lines MON863, MON810 and NK603.
RESPONSE
In their latest paper, Séralini and colleagues again use a statistical analysis approach to interpret data from animal toxicity studies. On this occasion, they apply their methodology to separate feeding studies in rats with GM corn lines MON863, MON810 and NK603, and claim that their analysis has identified “new side effects linked with GM maize consumption, which were sex- and often dose-dependent”.
The authors claim that their results show “signs of toxicity” mostly associated with the kidney and liver, although other effects were reported to have been identified in heart, adrenal glands, spleen and haematopoietic system. Based on their reported findings, the authors argue strongly that longer-term (up to 2 years) feeding experiments are necessary in at least three animal species forin vivosafety evaluation of GM foods.
In response to Séralini’s 2007 paper, an expert scientific panel dismissed similar claims made by these authors. FSANZ also independently investigated the material presented in the paper and concluded that the incidence of statistically significant differences in animals fed GM corn (MON863) is entirely consistent with normal background variability.
In their most recent paper, Séralini and colleagues reject the consensus view and instead propose a cause-and-effect link between the findings and the new pesticides (herbicide or insecticide) specific to each GM corn, or associate the results with unintended effects arising from the genetic modification process itself. The authors do not offer any plausible scientific explanations for their hypothesis, nor do they consider the lack of concordance of the statistics with other investigative processes used in the studies such as pathology, histopathology and histochemistry.
Séralini and colleagues have distorted the toxicological significance of their results by placing undue emphasis on the statistical treatment of data, and failing to take other relevant factors into account. Reliance solely on statistics to determine treatment related effects in such studies is not indicative of a robust toxicological analysis. There is no corroborating evidence that would lead independently to the conclusion that there were effects of toxicological significance. FSANZ remains confident that the changes reported in these studies are neither sex- nor dose-related and are primarily due to chance alone.
Background
Séralini and colleagues have now published several papers reporting on feeding studies with GM foods. In June 2009, Séralini and colleagues repeated claims made in an earlier article (Séraliniet al., 2007) that a statistical re-analysis of the toxicity data originally reported by Hammondet al., 2006 provided evidence of hepatorenal effects in rats fed GM maize for three months. No new data were presented in the article. Instead, the authors commented on a published report by an expert panel (Doullet al., 2007) that discussed the risk assessment conducted by Séraliniet al. 2007. For reasons not stated, the authors did not address the numerous deficiencies of their statistical re-analysis that had been reported by several international regulatory agencies (FSANZ 2007; EFSA 2007a; EFSA 2007 b; Monod 2007). Instead, they chose to focus on the issues raised in a later published report by Doull et al., 2007. In the absence of new data and the failure of the authors to acknowledge that the interpretation of toxicity studies does not only involve statistics but requires the need for biological context, FSANZ is of the opinion that the recent article from Séraliniet al. provides no grounds to revise its previous conclusions on the safety of food derived from MON 863 corn. The FSANZ assessment concluded that food derived from MON 863 corn is as safe and wholesome as food derived from other commercial corn varieties.
References
Doull J, Gaylor D, Greim HA, Lovell DP, Lynch B, Munro IC. Report of an expert panel on the reanalysis by Séralini et al. (2007) of a 90-day study conducted by Monsanto in support of the safety of a genetically modified corn variety (MON 863).Food Chem Toxicol2007;45:2073-2085.
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (2007a). Statement of the Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms on the analysis of data from a 90-day rat feeding study with MON 863 maize. Adopted 25 June 2007. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/cs/BlobServer/Statement/GMO_statement_MON863.pdf?ssbinary=true
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (2007b). EFSA review of statistical analyses conducted for the assessment of the MON 863 90-day rat feeding study. 28 June 2007. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/GMO_statement_MON863.pdf?ssbinary=true
FSANZ. Review of the report by Séraliniet al., (2007): “New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity”. Food Standards Australia New Zealand July 2007. http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/Review_of_Report_by_Seralini_et_al_July_2007.doc
Hammond B, Lemen J, Dudek R, Ward D, Jiang C, Nemeth M, Burns J. Results of a 90-day safety assurance study with rats fed grain from corn rootworm-protected corn.Food Chem Toxicol2006;44:147-160.
Monod H., 2007. Expérience sur rats menée par Monsanto en 2001-2002 avec certains régimes comportant du maïs génétiquement modifié: analyse statistique des courbes d’évolution du poids. Study conducted upon request of the CGB (Commission du Génie Moléculaire, France).
http://www.ogm.gouv.fr/experimentations/evaluation_scientifique/cgb/autres_avis/Avis_CGB_MON 863_15juin2007.pdf
Séralini G-E, Cellier D, de Vendomois JS. New analysis of a rat feeding study with genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity.Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 2007; 52:596-602.
Séralini G-E, de Vendomois JS, Cellier D, Sultan C, Buiatti M, Gallagher L, Antoniou M, Dronamraju KR. How subchronic and chronic health effects can be neglected for GMOs, pesticides or chemicals.Int J Biol Sci 2009;5:438-443.
de Vendomois J, Roullier F, Cellier D and Séralini G-E, A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health.Int J Biol Sci2009;5(7):706-726.
Reborn
Seeking Aslan's Country
Flipper, could you please post more detailed info on this mushroom complex? It would be greatly appreciated! TIA
Btw, I saw this this morning at Naharnet:
France Will Push for GM Ban if Cancer Threat Confirmed
http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/54348-france-will-push-for-gm-ban-if-cancer-threat-confirmed
Kent
Inactive
marymonde
Veteran Member
I posted this long video yesterday. What was interesting is that farmer's were interviewed about their animals and the farmers saw with their own eyes how sick their animals were on GMO's. When fed non-GMO feed, all the illnesses their animals were having, ceased. Furthermore, at the end of the film when the credits were rolling, they documented that when GMO feed and non-GMO feed were given to their chickens, pigs, etc. side by side, NONE of the animals would touch the GMO feed.
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?413416-Great-film-about-GMO-s-Well-worth-watching
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?413416-Great-film-about-GMO-s-Well-worth-watching
marymonde
Veteran Member
Vicki, I was just thinking this the other day, no more eating out. My dh retired last year and we have been eating out more. I, too, just do not trust where the food is coming from. There is a restaurant about 45 minutes from here that advertises where their food comes from, and much of it is from local, organic farms. I wish it were closer so I could have a piece of mind of what I was eating when my dh and I dined out.
You can buy organic popcorn. However, most people are not going to be aware at this point that the USDA certified label is no longer a guarantee against GMO ingredients. There are loopholes that allow the industry to bypass the regulations.
There is an alternative though, and that is the Non-GMO Project, which is a triangle label. This organization verifies not only the end product, but all of the supply chain ingredients.....and it's not run by the government. You can find out more via the links in my sig.
LeViolinist
Veteran Member
We buy this popcorn - organic - non-gmo - wonderful stuff in lots of different varieties and not too expensive.
Amish Country. amishcountrypopcorn.com
Amish Country. amishcountrypopcorn.com