The Future of Food

Unnatural Selection: Genetically Modified Canola growing wild in North Dakota

Bayer (IG Farben) and Monsanto (/Searle), two of the most evil companies in history, join forces to pollute our gene pool with their profit-motivated genetic tinkering.

Our society desperately needs to move to a techno-agrarian model using local food production and clean energy (solar and wind), domestic manufacturing, responsible mining, and renewable materials, with severely limited imports.  This is getting ridiculous.  It’s death to our environment by a thousand cuts.

For billions of years on this planet, there has not been the means to program genes manually and deliberately.   All mutations to genes have been due to random forces such as radiation or chemical damage.  Now we bring into the equation the psychology of profit combined with the ability to construct new organisms with specific purposes.  This is a quantum leap forward in terms of evolution.  In a sense it bypasses evolution since natural selection is not imposed on these new organisms.

It’s artifical,  unnatural selection, imposed by some sick, sick people.  We’re talking about the same companies that created Agent Orange defoliant (Monsanto) that caused horriffic birth defects, and Zyklon B Gas (IG Farben) used to kill concentration camp inmates in Germany during WW2.  Do we really trust them to be engaging in this sort of reckless activity that will surely have unforeseen consequences?  The biggest class action law suit you can imagine wouldn’t begin to recoup the cost of permanently removing GM plants and animals that have escaped into the wild.   There is no amount of money that can fix these problems.

From GM crop escapes into the American wild (Nature)

“The extent of the escape is unprecedented,” says Cynthia Sagers, an ecologist at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville, who led the research team that found the canola (Brassica napus, also known as rapeseed).

Sagers and her team found two varieties of transgenic canola in the wild — one modified to be resistant to Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide (glyphosate), and one resistant to Bayer Crop Science’s Liberty herbicide (gluphosinate). They also found some plants that were resistant to both herbicides, showing that the different GM plants had bred to produce a plant with a new trait that did not exist anywhere else.

Obama gives key agriculture post to Big Agri/Chem lobbyist

Today, President Obama announced that he will recess appoint Islam A. Siddiqui to the position of Chief Agricultural Negotiator, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

Siddiqui is a pesticide lobbyist and Vice President for Science and Regulatory Affairs at CropLife America, an agribusiness lobbying group that represents Monsanto.

Following is a letter sent by 98 organizations to U.S. Senators in opposition to Siddiqui’s appointment, and a fact sheet about him.

read more

Fury as EU approves GM potato

Critics claim plant could spread antibiotic-resistant diseases to humans

By Martin Hickman and Genevieve Roberts
Thursday, 4 March 2010
Independent.co.uk

BASF’s genetically modified Amflora potato, which has just been approved by the European Commission, contains genes that are resistant to antibiotics

The introduction of a genetically modified potato in Europe risks the development of human diseases that fail to respond to antibiotics, it was claimed last night.

German chemical giant BASF this week won approval from the European Commission for commercial growing of a starchy potato with a gene that could resist antibiotics – useful in the fight against illnesses such as tuberculosis.

Farms in Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic may plant the potato for industrial use, with part of the tuber fed to cattle, according to BASF, which fought a 13-year battle to win approval for Amflora. But other EU member states, including Italy and Austria and anti-GM campaigners angrily attacked the move, claiming it could result in a health disaster.

During the regulatory tussle over the potato, the EU’s pharmaceutical regulator had expressed concern about its potential to interfere with the efficacy of antibiotics on infections that develop multiple resistance to other antibiotics, a growing problem in human and veterinary medicine. Amflora contains a gene that produces an enzyme which generally confers resistance to several antibiotics, including kanamycin, neomycin, butirosin, and gentamicin.

The antibiotics could become “extremely important” to treat otherwise multi-resistant infections and tuberculosis, the European Medicines Authority (EMA) warned. Drug resistance is part of the explanation for the resurgence of TB, which infects eight million people worldwide every year.

“In the absence of an effective therapy, infectious Multiple Drug Resistant TB patients will continue to spread the disease, producing new infections with MDR-TB strains,” an EMA spokesman said. “Until we introduce a new drug with demonstrated activity against MDR strains, this aspect of the TB epidemic could explode at an exponential level.”

After member states become deadlocked on the potato’s approval, the European Commission approved it for use in industries such as paper production, saying it would save energy, water and chemicals. Once the starch has been removed, the skins can be fed to animals, whose meat would not have to be labelled as GM.

The EC, whose decision was backed by the European Food Safety Authority (Efsa), said there was no good reason for withholding approval. Health and consumer policy commissioner John Dalli said: “Responsible innovation will be my guiding principle when dealing with innovative technologies.”

“Stringent” controls would ensure none of the tubers were left in the ground, ensuring altered genes did not escape into the environment. Opponents fear bacteria inside the guts of animals fed the GM potato – which can cause human diseases – may develop resistance to antibiotics.

Some member states were furious. “Not only are we against this decision, but we want to underscore that we will not allow the questioning of member states’ sovereignty on this matter,” said Italy’s Agriculture Minister, Luca Zaia. Austria said it would ban cultivation of the potato within its borders, while France said it would ask an expert panel for further research.

Campaigners accused Brussels of failing to follow the precautionary principle. Friends of the Earth’s Heike Moldenhauer said: “The commissioner whose job is to protect consumers has, in one of his first decisions, ignored public opinion and safety concerns to please the world’s biggest chemical company.”

Campaigners suspect Brussels is in favour of the widespread planting of GM crops despite opposition by some member states. Yesterday it also announced its intention to allow states more leeway in backing GM organisms.

Study demonstrates the toxicity of three GM corn varieties from Monsanto

“We conclude that these data highlight signs of hepatorenal toxicity, possibly due to the new pesticides specific to each GM corn”

A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health. de Vendômois JS, Roullier F, Cellier D, Séralini GE. Int J Biol Sci 2009; 5:706-726.

Available from http://www.biolsci.org/v05p0706.htm | PDF
©Ivyspring International Publisher

Joël Spiroux de Vendômois¹, François Roullier¹, Dominique Cellier^1,2, Gilles-Eric Séralini^{1,3 ✉}

1. CRIIGEN, 40 rue Monceau, 75008 Paris, France
2. University of Rouen LITIS EA 4108, 76821 Mont-Saint-Aignan, France
3. University of Caen, Institute of Biology, Risk Pole CNRS, EA 2608, 14032 Caen, France

Abstract

We present for the first time a comparative analysis of blood and organ system data from trials with rats fed three main commercialized genetically modified (GM) maize (NK 603, MON 810, MON 863), which are present in food and feed in the world. NK 603 has been modified to be tolerant to the broad spectrum herbicide Roundup and thus contains residues of this formulation. MON 810 and MON 863 are engineered to synthesize two different Bt toxins used as insecticides. Approximately 60 different biochemical parameters were classified per organ and measured in serum and urine after 5 and 14 weeks of feeding. GM maize-fed rats were compared first to their respective isogenic or parental non-GM equivalent control groups. This was followed by comparison to six reference groups, which had consumed various other non-GM maize varieties. We applied nonparametric methods, including multiple pairwise comparisons with a False Discovery Rate approach. Principal Component Analysis allowed the investigation of scattering of different factors (sex, weeks of feeding, diet, dose and group). Our analysis clearly reveals for the 3 GMOs new side effects linked with GM maize consumption, which were sex- and often dose-dependent. Effects were mostly associated with the kidney and liver, the dietary detoxifying organs, although different between the 3 GMOs. Other effects were also noticed in the heart, adrenal glands, spleen and haematopoietic system. We conclude that these data highlight signs of hepatorenal toxicity, possibly due to the new pesticides specific to each GM corn. In addition, unintended direct or indirect metabolic consequences of the genetic modification cannot be excluded.

Germany bans Monsanto MON810 GM Corn

Germany’s Minister of Agriculture, Ilse Aigner announced a decision today to ban the cultivation Monsanto’s MON810 genetically modified Bt maize (corn), due to serious health, agricultural, and ecological concerns.

4 out of 5 German consumers are opposed to the importation of the maize, and the German BMELF (Federal Minsitry of Food, Agriculture, and Consumer Protection) decision reflects that view.

MON810, also known as YieldGard, is genetically modified to express an insecticide (Cry1Ab) that naturally in bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt).

This Bt maize has been approved for human consumption and animal feed in the US, unlabelled, since 1996, [1] and many other countries, despite significant risk to humans and other species.

A 2007 study by Greenpeace showed inconsistent levels of Bt toxin expressed between plants when grown in non-controlled agricultural settings.  The study found that levels of the toxic protein in some plants were up to 100 times lower than Monsanto claimed, raising questions about both the effectiveness of the plant at controlling pests, and the actual potency of the expressed pesticide. [3]

A US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) risk assessment study that concluded the maize was safe for human consumption was based on 3 studies in mice, and none in humans.

Richard Wolfson, PhD points out the recklessness of using the Bt maize in light of wofeul inadequacy of existing research.  There exists a likelyhood of ampicillin (antibiotic) resistant bacteria forming in animals that consume the corn.   The use of Bt corn and other crops will almost certainly selectively breed stronger pests that threaten organic crops, and they have been shown to harmful to beneficial insect species [2].

It is poorly understood whether genes from Bt maize will transfect other corn, permanently affecting gene lines of non-GM crops.

Unfortunately in many western countries, especially the US, big agribusiness and biotechnology industry has a stranglehold on regulatory agencies.  In the US, produce labeled as organic (indicated by a number 9 before the PLU number) may not be genetically modified.  Any produce not labelled organic may be GMO (genetically modified organisms), and even perpared, mixed foods labeled as organic, may contan GMOs.