More against soy

[Guest guest]

More against soy

Pat M

 

http://www.rense.com/general68/rats.htm

 

Most Offspring Died

When Mother Rats

Ate GM Soy

By Jeffrey M. Smith

Author of Seeds of Deception

GMWatch.com

10-31-5

 

 

The Russian scientist planned a simple experiment to

see if eating genetically modified (GM) soy might

influence offspring. What she got, however, was an

astounding result that may threaten a multi-billion

dollar industry.

 

Irina Ermakova, a leading scientist at the Institute

of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology of the

Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS), added GM soy flour

(5-7 grams) to the diet of female rats. Other females

were fed non-GM soy or no soy at all. The experimental

diet began two weeks before the rats conceived and

continued through pregnancy and nursing.

 

Ermakova's first surprise came when her pregnant rats

started giving birth. Some pups from GM-fed mothers

were quite a bit smaller. After 2 weeks, 36% of them

weighed less than 20 grams compared to about 6% from

the other groups (see photo below).

 

 

(Photo of two rats from the Russian study, showing

stunted growth - the larger rat, 19 days old, is from

the control group; the smaller rat, 20 days old, is

from the " GM soy " group.)

 

But the real shock came when the rats started dying.

Within three weeks, 25 of the 45 (55.6%) rats from the

GM soy group died compared to only 3 of 33 (9%) from

the non-GM soy group and 3 of 44 (6.8%) from the

non-soy controls.

 

Ermakova preserved several major organs from the

mother rats and offspring, drew up designs for a

detailed organ analysis, created plans to repeat and

expand the feeding trial, and promptly ran out of

research money. The $70,000 needed was not expected to

arrive for a year. Therefore, when she was invited to

present her research at a symposium organized by the

National Association for Genetic Security, Ermakova

wrote " PRELIMINARY STUDIES " on the top of her paper.

She presented it on October 10, 2005 at a session

devoted to the risks of GM food.

 

Her findings are hardly welcome by an industry already

steeped in controversy.

 

GM Soy's Divisive Past

 

The soy she was testing was Monsanto's Roundup Ready

variety. Its DNA has bacterial genes added that allow

the soy plant to survive applications of Monsanto's

" Roundup " brand herbicide. About 85% of the soy gown

in the US is Roundup Ready. Since soy derivatives,

including oil, flour and lecithin, are found in the

majority of processed foods sold in the US, many

Americans eat ingredients derived from Roundup Ready

soy everyday.

 

The FDA does not require any safety tests on

genetically modified foods. If Monsanto or other

biotech companies declare their foods safe, the agency

has no further questions. The rationale for this

hands-off position is a sentence in the FDA's 1992

policy that states, " The agency is not aware of any

information showing that foods derived by these new

methods differ from other foods in any meaningful or

uniform way. " [1] The statement, it turns out, was

deceptive. Documents made public from a lawsuit years

later revealed that the FDA's own experts agreed that

GM foods are different and might lead to

hard-to-detect allergens, toxins, new diseases or

nutritional problems. They had urged their superiors

to require long-term safety studies, but were ignored.

The person in charge of FDA policy was, conveniently,

Monsanto's former attorney (and later their vice

president). One FDA microbiologist described the GM

food policy as " just a political document " without

scientific basis, and warned that industry would " not

do the tests that they would normally do " since the

FDA didn't require any.[2] He was correct.

 

There have been less than 20 published, peer-reviewed

animal feeding safety studies and no human clinical

trials - in spite of the fact that millions of people

eat GM soy, corn, cotton, or canola daily. There are

no adequate tests on " biochemistry, immunology, tissue

pathology, gut function, liver function and kidney

function, " [3] and animal feeding studies are too short

to adequately test for cancer, reproductive problems,

or effects in the next generation. This makes

Ermakova's research particularly significant. It's the

first of its kind.

 

Past Studies Show Significant Effects

 

Other studies on Roundup Ready soy also raise serious

questions. Research on the liver, the body's major

de-toxifier, showed that rats fed GM soy developed

misshapen nuclei and other cellular anomalies.[4] This

indicates increased metabolic activity, probably

resulting from a major insult to that organ. Rats also

showed changes in the pancreas, including a huge drop

in the production of a major enzyme

(alpha-amylase),[5] which could inhibit digestion.

Cooked GM soy contains about twice the amount of soy

lectin, which can also block nutrient assimilation.[6]

And one study showed that GM soy has 12-14% less

isoflavones, which are touted as cancer fighting.[7]

 

An animal feeding study published by Monsanto showed

no apparent problems with GM soy,[8] but their

research has been severely criticized as rigged to

avoid finding problems.[9] Monsanto used mature

animals instead of young, more sensitive ones, diluted

their GM soy up to 12-fold, used too much protein,

never weighed the organs, and had huge variations in

starting weights. The study's nutrient comparison

between GM and non-GM soy revealed significant

differences in the ash, fat, and carbohydrate content,

lower levels of protein, a fatty acid, and

phenylalanine. Monsanto researchers had actually

omitted the most incriminating nutritional

differences, which were later discovered and made

public. For example, the published paper showed a 27%

increase in a known allergen, trypsin inhibitor, while

the recovered data raised that to a 3-fold or 7-fold

increase, after the soy was cooked. This might explain

why soy allergies in the UK skyrocketed by 50% soon

after GM soy was introduced.

 

The gene that is inserted into GM soy produces a

protein with two sections that are identical to known

allergens. This might also account for the increased

allergy rate. Furthermore, the only human feeding

trial ever conducted confirmed that this inserted gene

transfers into the DNA of bacteria inside the

intestines. This means that long after you decide to

stop eating GM soy, your own gut bacteria may still be

producing this potentially allergenic protein inside

your digestive tract.

 

The migration of genes might influence offspring.

German scientists found fragments of the DNA fed to

pregnant mice in the brains of their newborn.[10]

Fragments of genetically modified DNA were also found

in the blood, spleen, liver and kidneys of piglets

that were fed GM corn.[11] It was not clear if the GM

genes actually entered the DNA of the animal, but

scientists speculate that if it were to integrate into

the sex organ cells, it might impact offspring.

 

The health of newborns might also be affected by

toxins, allergens, or anti-nutrients in the mother's

diet. These may be created in GM crops, due to

unpredictable alterations in their DNA. The process of

gene insertion can delete one or more of the DNA's own

natural genes, scramble them, turn them off, or

permanently turn them on. It can also change the

expression levels of hundreds of genes. And growing

the transformed cell into a GM plant through a process

called tissue culture can create hundreds or thousands

of additional mutations throughout the DNA.

 

Most of these possibilities have not been properly

evaluated in Roundup Ready soy. We don't know how many

mutations or altered gene expressions are found in its

DNA. Years after it was marketed, however, scientists

did discover a section of natural soy DNA that was

scrambled[12] and two additional fragments of the

foreign gene that had escaped Monsanto's detection.

 

Those familiar with the body of GM safety studies are

often astounded by their superficiality. Moreover,

several scientists who discovered incriminating

evidence or even expressed concerns about the

technology have been fired, threatened, stripped of

responsibilities, or censured.[13] And when problems

do arise, they are not followed up. For example,

animals fed GM crops developed potentially

precancerous cell growth, smaller brains, livers and

testicles, damaged immune systems, bigger livers,

partial atrophy of the liver, lesions in the livers,

stomachs, and kidneys, inflammation of the kidneys,

problems with their blood cells, higher blood sugar

levels, and unexplained increases in the death rate.

(See Spilling the Beans, August 2004.) None have been

adequately followed-up or accounted for.

 

Ermakova's research, however, will likely change that.

That's because her study is easy to repeat and its

results are so extreme. A 55.6% mortality rate is

enormous and very worrisome. Repeating the study is

the only reasonable option.

 

American Academy of Environmental Medicine Urges NIH

to Follow Up Study

 

I presented Dr. Ermakova's findings, with her

permission, at the annual conference of the American

Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) in Tucson on

October 27, 2005. In response, the AAEM board passed a

resolution asking the US National Institutes of Health

(NIH) to sponsor an immediate, independent follow-up

of the study. Dr. Jim Willoughby, the Academy's

president, said, " Genetically modified soy, corn,

canola, and cottonseed oil are being consumed daily by

a significant proportion of our population. We need

rigorous, independent and long-term studies to

evaluate if these foods put the population at risk. "

 

Unfortunately, there is a feature about GM crops that

makes even follow-up studies a problem. In 2003, a

French laboratory analyzed the inserted genes in five

GM varieties, including Roundup Ready soybeans.[14] In

each case, the genetic sequence was different than

that which had been described by the biotech companies

years earlier. Had all the companies made a mistake?

That's unlikely. Rather, the inserted genes probably

rearranged over time. A Brussels lab confirmed that

the genetic sequences were different than what was

originally listed. But the sequences discovered in

Brussels didn't all match those found by the

French.[15] This suggests that the inserted genes are

unstable and can change in different ways. It also

means that they are creating new proteins-ones that

were never intended or tested. The Roundup Ready

soybeans used in the Russian test may therefore be

quite different from the Roundup Ready soybeans used

in follow-up studies.

 

Unstable genes make accurate safety testing

impossible. It also may explain some of the many

problems reported about GM foods. For example, nearly

25 farmers in the US and Canada say that certain GM

corn varieties caused their pigs to become sterile,

have false pregnancies, or give birth to bags of

water. A farmer in Germany claims that a certain

variety of GM corn killed 12 of his cows and caused

others to fall sick. And Filipinos living next to a GM

cornfield developed skin, respiratory, and intestinal

symptoms and fever, while the corn was pollinating.

The mysterious symptoms returned the following year,

also during pollination, and blood tests on 39 of the

Filipinos showed an immune response to the Bt

toxin-created by the GM corn.

 

These problems may be due to particular GM varieties,

or they may result from a GM crop that has " gone bad "

due to genetic rearrangements. Even GM plants with

identical gene sequences, however, might act

differently. The amount of Bt toxin in the Philippine

corn study described above, for example, varied

considerably from kernel to kernel, even in the same

plant.[16]

 

With billions of dollars invested in GM foods, no

adverse finding has yet been sufficient to reverse the

industry's growth in the US. It may take some

dramatic, indisputable, and life-threatening

discovery. That is why Ermakova's findings are so

important. If the study holds up, it may topple the GM

food industry.

 

I urge the NIH to agree to the AAEM's request, and

fund an immediate, independent follow-up study. If NIH

funding is not forthcoming, our Institute for

Responsible Technology will try to raise the money.

This is not the time to wait. There is too much at

stake.

 

Click here for press release on Russian rat study.

 

Click here for the resolution by the American Academy

of Environmental Medicine.

 

Click here for downloadable photos of the rats.

 

 

Jeffrey M. Smith is working with a team of

international scientists to catalog all known health

risks of GM foods. He is the author of Seeds of

Deception , the world's bestselling book on GM food,

and the producer of the video, Hidden Dangers in Kids'

Meals.

 

_____

 

" Do not be afraid of enemies; the worst they can do is to kill you. Do

not be afraid of friends; the worst they can do is betray you. Be afraid of the

indifferent; they do not kill or betray. But only because of their silent

agreement, betrayal and murder exist on earth. "

- - -- Bruno Yasienski - " The Plot of the Indifferent " (1937)

 

 

 

 

FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.

http://farechase.