GMW: Leaked Monsanto GM report causes uproar/Share price plunges

[Guest guest]

The people in the USA have been unknowingly eating genetically

modified food for about 8 or 9 years now because the US government

didn't think that they were important enough to tell them what they

were eating. It is estimated that about 85% of all refined food

products available on the store shelves in the US contain unlabeled GMOs.

 

 

GMW: Leaked Monsanto GM report causes uproar/Share price plunges

" GM WATCH " <info

Wed, 25 May 2005 12:11:02 +0100

 

 

 

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

------

1.Leaked Monsanto GM report causes uproar

2.Dear Monsanto...

 

Monsanto's share price plunged following leaks from a Monsanto report

showing that guinea pigs fed on Monsanto's GM corn developed serious

abnormalities and that there were kidney malformations and changes to

blood indicating damage to the immune system.

------

1.Leaked Monsanto GM report causes uproar

25/05/2005

http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/news/news-ng.asp?n=60214-leaked-monsanto-gm

 

Published details of a Monsanto report are at the center of a new storm

over whether genetically modified (GM) food could be harmful to human

health, <I>writes Anthony Fletcher

 

Details of the report, published by the Independent on Sunday in the

UK, are alleged to show that rats fed the genetically modified (GM) corn

MON 863 developed internal abnormalities, while these health problems

were absent from another batch of rodents fed non-GM food as part of the

research project.

 

The controversy comes as the Cartagena Biosafety Protocol summit meets

in Montreal this week to discuss issues such as bulk labeling of GM

crops and state liability in cases of contamination. Unsurprisingly

therefore, food safety campaigners have pounced on the disclosure.

 

" Monsanto's refusal to hand over animal feeding studies concerning its

biotech corn is outrageous " Bill Freese, research analyst for Friends

of the Earth US told FoodNavigator-USA.com

 

" I think it's fair to ask: Would Monsanto be hiding its safety studies

if it didn't have something to hide? " He points out that controversy

surrounding the rat study was first broken by French daily Le Monde over

a year ago, and that Monstanto is still refusing to release the study

in its entirety.

 

Nonethlesess, it appears that this most recent disclosure has hit

Monsanto hard. Shares were down 34 cents at $57.66 in early trading on

the

New York Stock Exchange on Monday. But the US biotech giant insists that

it supplied all required information to the European Food Safety

Authority (EFSA) prior to EFSA's 2004 favorable scientific opinion on the

company's MON 863 corn.

 

What's more, the company is adamant that there is no new information

about MON 863, modified to protect itself against corn rootworm, which

has not been submitted to EU regulators.

 

" That is not the case, " said Jerry Hjelle, vice president for Monsanto

Worldwide Regulatory Affairs. " Monsanto has provided all required data

and studies, including the subject rat study, to European regulatory

authorities, and EFSA reviewed these studies before issuing its opinion. "

 

Monsanto said that the product, which has been grown commercially in

the United States and Canada since 2003, is safe, and that EFSA's

Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms even published a

statement

on 29 October 2004 verifying this.

 

The company insists therefore that the research does not provide

evidence of any hidden dangers in biotechnology, only inconsequential

differences in kidney size and blood composition in the animals used.

It has

also defended its right not to disclose the full study as it " could be

of commercial use to our competitors and exploited by others for

commercial advantage, if made available. "

 

It insists that all the information about its MON 863 maize, which was

sent to the Independent on Sunday many weeks ago, is available

http://www.monsanto.co.uk/news/ukshowlib.phtml?uid=8846

[but see letter below]

 

Monsanto, based in St. Louis, Missouri, is the world's leading

developer of genetic modifications for corn, soybeans, cotton and

canola. It

argues that GM corn resistant to corn rootworm larvae could save US

business millions of dollars; the US Department of Agriculture estimates

that this pest causes $1 billion in lost revenue annually to the US maize

crop.

 

U.S. farmers have largely embraced new bitechnology. But other

countries, notably in the European Union, have been slow to approve the

products because of questions about how genetic changes in the plants

affect

humans and animals.

 

Monsanto is still seeking approval to import the biotech corn for use

in processed foods and derived food products, but the EU's 25

governments remain deadlocked over the issue.

------

2.Dear Monsanto... You are being disingenuous

 

FOR THE ATTENTION OF MR TONY COOMBES

info

 

Mr Tony Coombes

Head of Corporate Affairs

Monsanto UK

 

24th May 2005

 

Dear Mr Coombes,

 

The following information relating to the MON863 controversy has been

sent to me (pasted at base of this letter). You are being disingenuous

(to put it mildly) in your explanation as to why the 90-day MON863 rat

feeding study has not been put in the public domain. FSANZ decided

that it did NOT contain " confidential business information " , and it is a

scandal that the EC accepted your assurances that it did. If there is

anything genuinely sensitive in the full study (for example detail on

GM characterization or " manufacturing " ), feel free to wipe it out; but

let us see the rest of it, as you should according to the terms of the

relevant EU legislation. The only commercial advantage your

competitors would gain from seeing your results would be to make sure

that they

don't seek to develop any remotely similar maize line!

 

Technical reports containing research results are often put into the

public domain, as you know full well; and so they should be, since

" industry " reports have a tendency to be directed or specifically

written as

an aid to the obtaining of consents. If they will not stand up under

peer review they should not be used in support of the applicant in the

approvals process.

 

Now I come to your despicable treatment of Dr Arpad Pusztai on your web

site. You have named him in several places, and even referred to " The

Pusztai Report " -- in the full knowledge that he cannot respond because

you have forced him to sign a Declaration of Secrecy with the German

BfN. So he cannot defend himself, and neither can we, the members of the

public, judge whether your criticisms of him are justified. This does

not say a lot about your respect for natural justice.

 

If Dr Pusztai is prepared to defend his comments in an open scientific

forum, and if you have nothing to hide, you should permit all of the

research information on MON863 into the public domain.

 

We therefore ask you three simple questions:

 

1. Will you now, in response to the current intense public debate on

the safety of MON863, release the full 90-day rat feeding study into the

public domain?

 

2. Will you release Dr Pusztai and the German BfN from their

Declarations of Secrecy and allow them to freely express their

concerns about

the rat feeding study?

 

3. Will you publish Dr Pusztai's comments in full on your web site, or

at the very least provide a hyperlink to another web site where they

are published?

 

If you do not accede to these requests, I am afraid that we shall all

have to accept that Monsanto does have something to hide; that it is

prepared to corrupt the scientific enterprise; and that it wants nothing

to do with conventional scientific debate. We will then be able to draw

our own conclusions as to whether MON863 is harmful or not.

 

I look forward to hearing from you as a matter of urgency.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Dr Brian John

 

 

 

 

--------------