Genetically Engineered Crops May Cause

[Guest guest]

Monsanto Whistleblower Says Genetically Engineered Crops May Cause

Disease

 

By Jeffrey M. Smith

 

Monsanto was quite happy to recruit young Kirk Azevedo to sell their

genetically engineered cotton. Kirk had grown up on a California farm

and had worked in several jobs monitoring and testing pesticides and

herbicides. Kirk was bright, ambitious, handsome and idealistic-the

perfect candidate to project the company's " Save the world through

genetic engineering " image.

 

It was that image, in fact, that convinced Kirk to take the job in

1996. " When I was contacted by the headhunter from Monsanto, I began

to study the company, namely the work of their CEO, Robert Shapiro. "

Kirk was thoroughly impressed with Shapiro's promise of a golden

future through genetically modified (GM) crops. " He described how we

would reduce the in-process waste from manufacturing, turn our fields

into factories and produce anything from lifesaving drugs to

insect-resistant plants. It was fascinating to me. " Kirk thought,

" Here we go. I can do something to help the world and make it a

better place. "

 

He left his job and accepted a position at Monsanto, rising quickly to

become the facilitator for GM cotton sales in California and Arizona.

He would often repeat Shapiro's vision to customers, researchers,

even fellow employees. After about three months, he visited

Monsanto's St. Louis headquarters for the first time for new employee

training. There too, he took the opportunity to let his colleagues know

how enthusiastic he was about Monsanto's technology that was going to

reduce waste, decrease poverty and help the world. Soon after the

meeting, however, his world was shaken.

 

" A vice president pulled me aside, " recalled Kirk. " He told me

something like, 'Wait a second. What Robert Shapiro says is one

thing. But what we do is something else. We are here to make money. He

is the front man who tells a story. We don't even understand what he

is saying.' "

 

Kirk felt let down. " I went in there with the idea of helping and

healing and came out with 'Oh, I guess it is just another

profit-oriented company.' " He returned to California, still holding

out hopes that the new technology could make a difference.

 

Possible Toxins in GM Plants

 

Kirk was developing the market in the West for two types of GM cotton.

Bt cotton was engineered with a gene from a soil bacterium, Bacillus

thuringiensis. Organic farmers use the natural form of the bacterium as

an insecticide, spraying it occasionally during times of high pest

infestation. Monsanto engineers, however, isolated and then altered the

gene that produces the Bt-toxin, and inserted it into the DNA of the

cotton plant. Now every cell of their Bt cotton produces a toxic

protein. The other variety was Roundup Ready® cotton. It contains

another bacterial gene that enables the plant to survive an otherwise

toxic dose of Monsanto's Roundup® herbicide. Since the patent on

Roundup's main active ingredient, glyphosate, was due to expire in

2000, the company was planning to sell Roundup Ready seeds that were

bundled with their Roundup herbicide, effectively extending their

brand's dominance in the herbicide market.

 

In the summer of 1997, Kirk spoke with a Monsanto scientist who was

doing some tests on Roundup Ready cotton. Using a " Western blot "

analysis, the scientist was able to identify different proteins by

their molecular weight. He told Kirk that the GM cotton not only

contained the intended protein produced by the Roundup Ready gene, but

also extra proteins that were not normally produced in the plant. These

unknown proteins had been created during the gene insertion process.

 

Gene insertion was done using a gene gun (particle bombardment). Kirk,

who has an undergraduate degree in biochemistry, understood this to be

" a kind of barbaric and messy method of genetic engineering, where

you use a gun-like apparatus to bombard the plant tissue with genes

that are wrapped around tiny gold particles. " He knew that particle

bombardment can cause unpredictable changes and mutations in the DNA,

which might result in new types of proteins.

 

The scientist dismissed these newly created proteins in the cotton

plant as unimportant background noise, but Kirk wasn't convinced.

Proteins can have allergenic or toxic properties, but no one at

Monsanto had done a safety assessment on them. " I was afraid at that

time that some of these proteins may be toxic. " He was particularly

concerned that the rogue proteins " might possibly lead to mad cow or

some other prion-type diseases. "

 

Kirk had just been studying mad cow disease (bovine spongiform

encephalopathy) and its human counterpart, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease

(CJD). These fatal diseases had been tracked to a class of proteins

called prions. Short for " proteinaceous infectious particles, "

prions are improperly folded proteins, which cause other healthy

proteins to also become misfolded. Over time, they cause holes in the

brain, severe dysfunction and death. Prions survive cooking and are

believed to be transmittable to humans who eat meat from infected

" mad " cows. The disease may incubate undetected for about 2 to 8

years in cows and up to 30 years in humans.

 

When Kirk tried to share his concerns with the scientist, he realized,

" He had no idea what I was talking about; he had not even heard of

prions. And this was at a time when Europe had a great concern about

mad cow disease and it was just before the noble prize was won by

Stanley Prusiner for his discovery of prion proteins. " Kirk said

" These Monsanto scientists are very knowledge about traditional

products, like chemicals, herbicides and pesticides, but they don't

understand the possible harmful outcomes of genetic engineering, such

as pathophysiology or prion proteins. So I am explaining to him about

the potential untoward effects of these foreign proteins, but he just

did not understand. "

 

Endangering the Food Supply

 

At this time, Roundup Ready cotton varieties were just being introduced

into other regions but were still being field-tested in California.

California varieties had not yet been commercialized. But Kirk came to

find out that Monsanto was feeding the cotton plants used in its test

plots to cattle.

 

" I had great issue with this, " he said. " I had worked for Abbot

Laboratories doing research, doing test plots using Bt sprays from

bacteria. We would never take a test plot and put into the food supply,

even with somewhat benign chemistries. We would always destroy the test

plot material and not let anything into the food supply. Now we entered

into a new era of genetic engineering. The standard was not the same as

with pesticides. It was much lower, even though it probably should have

been much higher. "

 

Kirk complained to the Ph.D. in charge of the test plot about feeding

the experimental plants to cows. He explained that unknown proteins,

including prions, might even effect humans who consume the cow's milk

and meat. The scientist replied, " Well that's what we're doing

everywhere else and that's what we're doing here. " He refused to

destroy the plants.

 

Kirk got a bit frantic. He started talking to others in the company.

" I approached pretty much everyone on my team in Monsanto. " He was

unable to get anyone interested. In fact, he said, " Once they

understood my perspective, I was somewhat ostracized. It seemed as if

once I started questioning things, people wanted to keep their distance

from me. I lost the cooperation with other team members. Anything that

interfered with advancing the commercialization of this technology was

going to be pushed aside. "

 

He then approached California Agriculture Commissioners. " These local

Ag commissioners are traditionally responsible for test plots and to

make sure test plot designs protect people and the environment. " But

Kirk got nowhere. " Once again, even at the Ag commissioner level,

they were dealing with a new technology that was beyond their

comprehension. They did not really grasp what untoward effects might be

created by the genetic engineering process itself. "

 

Kirk continued to try to blow the whistle on what he thought could be

devastating to the health of consumers. " I spoke to many Ag

commissioners. I spoke to people at the University of California. I

found no one who would even get it, or even get the connection that

proteins might be pathogenic, or that there might be untoward effects

associated with these foreign proteins that we knew we were producing.

They didn't even want to talk about it really. You'd kind of see a

blank stare when speaking to them on this level. That led me to say I

am not going to be part of this company anymore. I'm not going to be

part of this disaster, from a moral perspective. "

 

Kirk gave his two-week notice. In early January 1998, he finished his

last day of work in the morning and in the afternoon started his first

day at chiropractic college. He was still determined to make a positive

difference for the world, but with a radically changed approach.

 

While in school, he continued to research prion disease and its

possible connection with GM crops. What he read then and what is known

now about prions has not alleviated his concerns. He says, " The

protein that manifests as mad cow disease takes about five years. With

humans, however, that time line is anywhere from 10-30 years. We were

talking about 1997 and today is 2006. We still don't know if there is

anything going to happen to us from our being used as test subjects. "

 

Update

 

It turns out that the damage done to DNA due to the process of creating

a genetically modified organism is far more extensive than previously

thought.[1] GM crops routinely create unintended proteins, alter

existing protein levels or even change the components and shape of the

protein that is created by the inserted gene. Kirk's concerns about a

GM crop producing a harmful misfolded protein remain well-founded, and

have been echoed by scientists as one of the many possible dangers that

are not being evaluated by the biotech industry's superficial safety

assessments.

 

GM cotton has provided ample reports of unpredicted side-effects. In

April 2006, more than 70 Indian shepherds reported that 25% of their

herds died within 5-7 days of continuous grazing on Bt cotton

plants.[2] Hundreds of Indian agricultural laborers reported allergic

reactions from Bt cotton. Some cotton harvesters have been hospitalized

and many laborers in cotton gin factories take antihistamines each day

before work.[3]

 

The cotton's agronomic performance is also erratic. When Monsanto's

GM cotton varieties were first introduced in the US, tens of thousands

of acres suffered deformed roots and other unexpected problems.

Monsanto paid out millions in settlements.[4] When Bt cotton was tested

in Indonesia, widespread pest infestation and drought damage forced

withdrawal of the crop, despite the fact that Monsanto had been bribing

at least 140 individuals for years, trying to gain approval.[5] In

India, inconsistent performance has resulted in more than $80 million

dollars in losses in each of two states.[6] Thousands of indebted Bt

cotton farmers have committed suicide. In Vidarbha, in north east

Maharashtra, from June through August 2006, farmers committed suicide

at a rate of about one every eight hours.[7] (The list of adverse

reactions reported from other GM crops, in lab animals, livestock and

humans, is considerably longer.)

 

Kirk's concern about GM crop test plots also continues to remain

valid. The industry has been consistently inept at controlling the

spread of unapproved varieties. On August 18, 2006, for example, the

USDA announced that unapproved GM long grain rice, which was last field

tested by Bayer CropScience in 2001, had contaminated the US rice

crop[8] (probably for the past 5 years). Japan responded by suspending

long grain rice imports and the EU will now only accept shipments that

are tested and certified GM-free. Similarly, in March 2005, the US

government admitted that an unapproved corn variety had escaped from

Syngenta's field trials four years earlier and had contaminated US

corn.[9] By year's end, Japan had rejected at least 14 shipments

containing the illegal corn. Other field trialed crops have been mixed

with commercial varieties, consumed by farmers, stolen, even given away

by government agencies and universities who had accidentally mixed seed

varieties.

 

Some contamination from field trials may last for centuries. That may

be the fate of a variety of unapproved Roundup Ready grass which,

according to reports made public in August 2006, had escaped into the

wild from an Oregon test plot years earlier. Pollen had crossed with

other varieties and wind had dispersed seeds. Scientists believe that

the variety will cross pollinate with other grass varieties and may

contaminate the commercial grass seed supply-70 percent of which is

grown in Oregon.

 

Even GM crops with known poisons are being grown outdoors without

adequate safeguards for health and the environment. A corn engineered

to produce pharmaceutical medicines, for example, contaminated corn and

soybean fields in Iowa and Nebraska in 2002.[10] On August 10, 2006, a

federal judge ruled that the drug-producing GM crops grown in Hawaii

violated both the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental

Policy Act.[11]

 

A December 29, 2005 report by the USDA office of Inspector General,

blasted the agriculture department for its abysmal oversight of GM

field trials, particularly for the high risk drug producing crops.[12]

And a January 2004 report by the National Research Council also called

upon the government to strengthen its oversight, but acknowledged that

there is no way to guarantee that field trialed crops will not pollute

the environment.[13]

 

With the US government failing to prevent GM contamination, and with

state governments and agriculture commissioners unwilling to challenge

the dictates of the biotech industry, some California counties decided

to enact regulations of their own. California's diverse agriculture

is particularly vulnerable and thousands of field trials on

not-yet-approved GM crops have already taken place there. If

contamination were discovered, it could easily devastate an industry.

Four counties have enacted moratoria or bans on the planting of GM

crops, including both approved and unapproved varieties. This follows

the actions of more than 4500 jurisdictions in Europe and dozens of

nations, states and regions on all continents, which have sought to

restrict planting of GM crops to protect their health, environment and

agriculture.

 

Ironically, California's assembly, which has done nothing to protect

the state from possible losses due to GM crop contamination, passed a

bill on August 24, 2006 that prohibits other counties and cities from

creating GM free zones. The senate is expected to vote on the issue by

the end of their session on August 31st (see

http://www.calgefree.org/preemption.shtml). It is yet another example

of how the biotech industry has been able to push their agenda onto US

consumers, without regard to health and environmental safeguards. No

doubt that their lobbyists, anxious to have this bill pass, told

legislators that GM crops are needed to stop poverty and feed a hungry

world.

 

 

 

Jeffrey Smith's forthcoming book, Genetic Roulette, documents more

than 60 health risks of GM foods in easy-to-read two-page spreads, and

demonstrates how current safety assessments are not competent to

protect consumers from the dangers. His previous book, Seeds of

Deception (www.seedsofdeception.com), is the world's best-selling

book on the subject. He is available for media at

info. Dr. Kirk Azevedo has a chiropractic office

in Cambria, California. Press may reach him at (805) 927-1055 or at

drkirk(at)charter.net.

 

Spilling the Beans is a monthly column available at

www.responsibletechnology.org.

 

Permission is granted to publishers and webmasters to reproduce issues

of Spilling the Beans in whole or in part. Just email us at

column to let us know who you are and what your

circulation is, so we can keep track.

 

The Institute for Responsible Technology is working to end the genetic

engineering of our food supply and the outdoor release of GM crops. We

warmly welcome your donations and support.

 

Click here if you'd like to make a tax-deductible donation, or click

here if you would like to become a member of the Institute for

Responsible Technology. Membership to the Institute for Responsible

Technology costs $25 per year. New members receive The GMO Trilogy, a

three-disc set produced by Jeffrey Smith (see www.GMOTrilogy.com).

 

[1] JR Latham et al., " The Mutational Consequences of Plant

Transformation, " The Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology, Vol

2006 Article ID 25376 Pages 1-7, DOI 10.1155/JBB/2006/25376; for a more

in-depth discussion, see also Allison Wilson et al., " Genome

Scrambling -Myth or Reality? Transformation-Induced Mutations in

Transgenic Crop Plants, Technical Report - October 2004,

www.econexus.info.

[2] Mortality in Sheep Flocks after Grazing on Bt Cotton Fields -

Warangal District, Andhra Pradesh. Report of the Preliminary Assessment

April 2006, http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6494

[3] Ashish Gupta, et. al., Impact of Bt Cotton on Farmers' Health (in

Barwani and Dhar District of Madhya Pradesh), Investigation Report,

Oct - Dec 2005

[4] See for example, Monsanto Cited In Crop Losses New York Times, June

16, 1998 ,

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A04EED6153DF935A25755C0A96E95826\

0;

and Greenpeace

http://archive.greenpeace.org/geneng/reports/gmo/intrgmo5.htm

[5] Antje Lorch, Monsanto Bribes in Indonesia, Monsanto Fined For

Bribing Indonesian Officials to Avoid Environmental Studies for Bt

Cotton, ifrik 1sep2005,

http://www.mindfully.org/GE/2005/Monsanto-Bribes-Indonesia1sep05.htm

[6] Bt Cotton - No Respite for Andhra Pradesh Farmers More than 400

crores' worth losses for Bt Cotton farmers in Kharif 2005 Centre for

Sustainable Agriculture: Press Release, March 29, 2006

http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6393; see also November 14,

2005 article in www.NewKerala.com regarding Madhya Pradesh.

[7] Jaideep Hardikar, One suicide every 8 hours, Daily News & Analysis

(India), August 26, 2006

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1049554

[8] Rick Weiss, U.S. Rice Supply Contaminated, Genetically Altered

Variety Is Found in Long-Grain Rice, Washington Post, August 19, 2006

[9] Jeffrey Smith, US Government and Biotech Firm Deceive Public on GM

Corn Mix-up, Spilling the Beans, April 2005

 

[10] See for example, Christopher Doering, ProdiGene to spend millions

on bio-corn tainting, Reuters News Service, USA: December 9, 2002

 

[11] See www.centerforfoodsafety.org

 

[12] Office of Inspector General, USDA, Audit Report Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service Controls Over Issuance of Genetically

Engineered Organism Release Permits, December 2005

http://www.thecampaign.org/USDA_IG_1205.pdf

 

[13] Justin Gillis, Genetically Modified Organisms Not Easily

Contained; National Research Council Panel Urges More Work to Protect

Against Contamination of Food Supply, WashingtonPost, Jan 21, 2004

 

© copyright Jeffrey M. Smith 2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

If George Bush said that the Earth was flat, the headline would read, " Views

Differ on Shape of the Earth "