-Caveat Lector-

<---- Begin Forwarded Message ---->
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 18:29:10 -0800
From: OBRL-News <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:- More on Genetically Engineered "Food"

Orgone Biophysical Research Lab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://id.mind.net/community/orgonelab/index.htm
Forwarded News Item

Please copy and distribute to other interested individuals and groups

**********

Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 19:58:51 -0300
From: Lino Guedes Pires <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From Science Magazine, 283(5405):1094.

On television, Arpad Pusztai said that potatoes that were genetically
altered to resist pests stunted growth and suppressed immunity in rats
after they had eaten the potatoes for 110 days. Initially, the Rowett
Research Institute supported his conclusions. However, two days after the
television program, the head of the institute called his claims "a total
muddle," and Pusztai was suspended.

Last week, 21 European and American  scientists said his conclusions were
correct and demanded that he be reinstated. Meanwhile, members of the
House of Commons urged a moratorium on genetically-altered food
and charged the government and the biotech industry with trying to
suppress the data.

The transgenic potatoes were encoded for lectin, a protein that can deter
pests.

Reference: Enserink, M. 1999.  Preliminary data touch off genetic food
fight.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gagging on genetically modified food

The Rowett Research Institute of Aberdeen has lifted a ban
on one of its former scientists, allowing him to speak to the
press. Director Philip James made the decision to allay fears
that Rowett was trying to suppress data that questioned the
health affects of eating genetically altered food.

The ban was ordered after Arpad Pusztai, a senior researcher at  Rowett
and an expert on lectins, said on television that rats fed with potatoes
that were genetically modified to produce lectin suffered retarded growth,
depressed immune systems, and reduced body weight.  Pusztai was suspended,
his contract not renewed, and he retired at the age of 68.  More than a
score of scientists from around the world protested the action, saying his
research supported his conclusions.


Reference: Masood, E. 1999. Gag on food scientist is lifted as gene
modification row hots up. Nature Magazine 397(6720):547.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blair resists moratorium

The brouhaha over genetically altered foods has a serious
political aspect: Prime Minister Tony Blair is refusing to
support a moratorium on the produce despite demands from
the opposition party and his own wildlife advisory body.

The Conservative Party also has demanded the resignation of Blair's
science minister, Lord David Sainsbury, who is an enthusiastic supporter
of modified food.  Sainsbury was the chairman of the supermarket chain
bearing his name that started selling modified food last year.

Opponents also  question whether Britain's regulatory infrastructure is
capable of ensuring the safety of commercial releases of  modified crops.
Environmental groups insist that the standards should be analogous to
those imposed on pharmaceuticals.


Reference: Masood, E. 1999. . . . and Blair resists demands for a
moratorium. Nature Magazine 397(6720):547.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

.                                                               .
.           RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #639           .
.                    ---February 25, 1999---                    .
.                          HEADLINES:                           .
.             GENETICALLY ALTERING THE WORLD'S FOOD             .
.                          ==========                           .
.               Environmental Research Foundation               .
.              P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD  21403              .
.          Fax (410) 263-8944; E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]           .
.                          ==========                           .
.    All back issues are available by E-mail: send E-mail to    .
.   [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the single word HELP in the message.   .
.  Back issues are also available from http://www.rachel.org.   .
.      To start your own free subscription, send E-mail to      .
.              [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words               .
.       SUBSCRIBE RACHEL-WEEKLY YOUR NAME in the message.       .
=================================================================


GENETICALLY ALTERING THE WORLD'S FOOD

On January 14, after an 8-year scientific review, Canada rejected Monsanto
corporation's request for approval of its genetically altered milk
hormone, rBGH, a drug that makes dairy cows produce 10% more milk than
normal.[1] This was a serious setback for Monsanto because rBGH was the
company's first genetically-engineered product and Monsanto had hoped
international acceptance of rBGH would smoothe the way for its other
genetically-engineered farm crops like cotton, tomatoes, potatoes, rice,
corn, and soybeans.

The approval process for rBGH in Canada became an embarrasing
political fiasco when Canadian health officials claimed Monsanto
had tried to bribe them, which the company denied, and government
scientists testified that they were being pressured by higher-ups
to approve rBGH against their better scientific judgment. (See
REHW #621.)

Ultimately, Canada gave a thumbs down to rBGH because, as the
product label acknowledges, it can cause udder infections,
painful, debilitating foot disorders, and reduced life span in
treated cows.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the use of rBGH
in U.S. dairy cows in November, 1993, without taking a position
on the issue of cruelty to animals. Monsanto will not reveal how
widely the drug has been adopted by U.S. dairy farmers.

Monsanto says it will appeal the rBGH decision within the
Canadian government. But more importantly, Monsanto will ask the
World Health Organization's Codex Alimentarius to declare rBGH
safe when Codex meets in Rome this coming summer. If Codex issues
the statement that Monsanto wants, under the World Trade
Organization's rules, Canada will lose its right to ban the use
of rBGH within its borders, and Monsanto will be one step closer
to its goal.[1] At bottom, this is what "free trade" is about --
freeing transnational corporations from control by nation states.
Codex Alimentarius is widely perceived to be dominated not by
public-spirited health specialists but by scientists aligned with
the interests of transnational corporations.

Despite the recent setback for rBGH in Canada, Monsanto is
pressing ahead with its plan to dominate world agriculture by
selling genetically modified seeds -- a plan it is pursuing with
powerful aid from the highest levels of the U.S. government.

Both inside and outside the U.S., Monsanto is selling two basic
varieties of genetically-modified seeds: "Roundup Ready" seeds
that have been genetically modified to withstand a heavy soaking
with Monsanto's best-selling herbicide, Roundup (glyphosate). And
a group of seeds implanted with a Bt gene, which produces a
pesticidal toxin in every cell of the resulting plant.
Caterpillars that eat any part of such a plant will die, at least
until the whole caterpillar population develops "resistance" to
the Bt toxin. (For more detail, see REHW #637 and #638.)

Within the U.S., genetically altered crops are rapidly coming
into widespread use. In 1995, no genetically-modified crops were
grown for commercial sale. Three years later, in 1998, 73 million
acres of genetically-modified crops were grown worldwide, more
than 50 million acres of them in the U.S. To allow this rapid
change to occur with a minimum of resistance from consumers, the
FDA has declared that genetically modified foods do not need to
be labeled, thus depriving consumers of the opportunity to make
an informed choice in the grocery store. You cannot refuse to buy
what you cannot identify. It is presently estimated that some
30,000 items in U.S. grocery stores already contain genetically
modified organisms.[2]

Monsanto has announced that by the year 2000 (next year), 100% of
U.S. soybeans (60 million acres) will be genetically modified.

Actually, 100% really means something like 99.9%.  Even if Monsanto
reaches it's "100%" goal, there will continue to be a small acreage
devoted to organically-grown, traditional soybeans.  However, if Monsanto
has its way, even these organically-grown non-genetically-modified
soybeans will become difficult to identify.  Last year when the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) proposed national standards to define
what "organically grown" means, Monsanto and USDA proposed to allow
genetically-modified crops to be labeled "organic."  (See REHW #583.)
After USDA received 300,000 letters of opposition from an angry public,
USDA and Monsanto both withdrew the proposal.  But three years from now,
Monsanto will be back, urging the government to allow the "organic" label
on genetically modified crops.  If USDA goes along with Monsanto's plan,
then the "organic" label will become meaningless and consumers will have
to trust their grocers to supply soybeans that have not been genetically
modified. But few grocers will have any way to know.

According to a series of reports by Bill Lambrecht in the ST.
LOUIS POST-DISPATCH, Monsanto's overarching plan is to gain
approval for genetically modified crops in Europe, then use the
European imprimatur to sell its technology to Europe's former
colonies in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

It won't be easy. In Ireland, Great Britain, France and India,
farmer-led uprisings have burned and destroyed Monsanto's test
plots. In India, Monsanto is growing genetically modified plants
in green houses constructed of bullet-proof plastic. Monsanto
insists its goal is "doing well by doing good" but farmers
outside the U.S. are deeply suspicious.

Of particular concern is Monsanto's latest genetic technique
called the Technology Protection System, commonly known as
"terminator technology." Developed with taxpayer money by the
U.S. Department of Agriculture but patented by a
Mississippi-based seed company that Monsanto has recently
purchased, terminator technology is a genetic technique that
renders the seeds of crops sterile after one or two years. This
assures that Monsanto's seeds cannot be illegally saved and
re-planted year after year.

With terminator technology, anyone who becomes dependent upon
Monsanto's genetically-modified seed will have to come back to
Monsanto year after year to purchase new seed. By this means,
Monsanto will gain a substantial measure of control over the food
supply of any nation that widely adopts the company's genetic
technologies. It is not a conspiracy, merely a shrewd business
venture, but it is clear that Monsanto's goal is effective
control of many of the staple crops that presently feed the
world.

>From its own perspective, the U.S. government evidently believes
Monsanto's goal is worth supporting. According to Bill Lambrecht
of the ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH, when Irish Prime Minister Bertie
Ahern arrived in the U.S. in 1998 for a St. Patrick's Day visit,
he was met by Sandy Berger, the director of the U.S. National
Security Council. The topic of conversation at lunch was not
peace in war-torn Ireland, but Ireland's pivotal vote in a
pending European Community decision on Monsanto's genetically
modified corn.[3] Lambrecht reports that when Monsanto flew a
group of Irish journalists to the U.S. to help them prepare for
the debate over genetically modified foods, their trip included a
stop in the Oval Office at the White House -- an inner sanctum
that few visitors to Washington ever see.

When the French were reluctant to allow Monsanto's seeds to
sprout on French soil, Secretary of State Madeline Albright and
U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshevsky intervened on
Monsanto's behalf. When the French still refused to yield,
President Clinton personally took up the matter with French Prime
Minister Lionel Jospin and gave him "an earful," Lambrecht
writes. When that didn't work, Vice-President Gore followed up
with a phone call to the French Prime Minister. Ultimately, the
French gave in to the steady, high-level pressure.

"Wherever Monsanto seeks to sow, the U.S. government clears the
ground," writes Lambrecht, who calls the U.S. government
Monsanto's "most powerful ally."

"From the White House and the National Security Council on down,"
Lambrecht writes, "the apparatus of the U.S. Government worked
this year [1998] on behalf of biotechnology. For Monsanto, at
this moment, it is like having an Olympic basketball team with
several Michael Jordans."[3]

We are speculating, but it appears to us that the U.S. government
may view genetically modified crops as a powerful new arm of U.S.
foreign policy. Nations whose staple foods are grown from seed
that they must purchase year after year from a handful of U.S.
corporations are nations likely to see the world the way the U.S.
wants them to see it. When asked, they are likely to play ball,
whether they want to or not. A new world order, indeed.

*          *           *

Readers who would like to become active on this issue are urged
to read the new publication, MONSANTO MONITOR, which is now being
published in the Netherlands. Available via mail or E-mail.
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or write: P.O. Box 92066, 1090
AB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Phone: +31-20-468 2626; fax:
+31-20-468 2275. Or: www.antenna.nl/aseed.

*          *           *

Other excellent sources for action ideas and information include
these:

1) Canada's Rural Advancement Foundation International (RAFI) at
www.rafi.org; In North Carolina, phone (919) 542-1396; fax: (919)
542-0069; e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In Canada, phone (204) 453-5259;
fax: (204) 925-8034; e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2) Physicians and Scientists Against Genetically Engineered Food
at www.psagef.org/sitemap.htm.

3) The Campaign for Food Safety at www.purefood.org; telephone
(218) 226-4164; e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]

4) Food & Water, 389 Vermont Route 215, Walden, VT 05873; phone:
(802) 563-3300; fax: (802) 563-3310. Their FOOD & WATER JOURNAL
is must reading.


==========
[1] Kelly Morris, "Bovine somatotropin--who's crying over spilt
milk?" LANCET Vol. 353 (January 23, 1999), pg. 306. For more
detail on this story, see Brewster and Cathleen Kneen, "rbGH--for
the last time?" RAM'S HORN No. 166 (February 1999), pg. 1. The
RAM'S HORN [ISSN 0827-4053]: S-12, C-11, R.R. #1, Sorrento, B.C.
V0E 2W0, Canada, is $20 (U.S.) per year (11 issues). E-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; or phone (250) 835-8561. Well worth the
price.

[2] These big-name products include genetically modified
ingredients: Coca-Cola (corn syrup and/or Aspartame), Fritos
(corn), Green Giant Harvest Burgers (soy), McDonald's french
fries (potatoes), Nestle's chocolate (soy), Karo corn syrup
(corn), NutraSweet (Aspartame), Kraft salad dressings (canola
oil), Fleishmann's margarine (soy), Similac infant formula (soy),
Land o' Lakes butter (rBGH), Cabot Creamery Butter (rBGH).

If you want to avoid genetically modified products entirely, stay
away from non-organic tomatoes, potatoes, corn, soy, canola and
yellow squash. Avoid corn syrup and fructose--which are in almost
all beverages and sodas (even health food brands) and in almost
all sweet products, yogurt and aspirin. Avoid non-organic corn
oil, cornstarch, corn meal, baking soda, baking powder, glycose
syrup. Avoid soy; soy flour in baked goods, pizza, cookies,
cakes, pasta; fillers in meat products (for example Big Macs),
vegetarian meat substitutes (for example tofu, tofu burgers, tofu
hot dogs), soy milk, infant formula, babyfoods; diet and protein
shakes, protein bars; chocolate and candy bars; margarine; ice
cream; pet food; soy oil in salad dressings and snack chips; soy
sauce; lecithin and soy lecithin. In all, well over 30,000
products.

Aspartame--the artificial sweetener Equal or NutraSweet--contains
a genetically engineered enzyme, as do most non-organic cheeses.
Amylase (used in making bread, flour, whole wheat flour, cereals,
starch), Catalase (used in making soft drinks, egg whites, liquid
whey) and Lactase are all genetically altered.

Most livestock and commercial seafood are being fed genetically
modified feed. Commercial pork has been genetically altered with
DNA from human beings.

Data from: Phillip Frazer and Annie Berthold-Bond, editors, NEWS
ON EARTH, December, 1998, pg. 4. NEWS ON EARTH [ISSN 1099-0054]
is a high-quality environmental newsletter published monthly;
write them at 175 Fifth Avenue, Ste. 2245, NY, NY 10010; or
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; or phone (212) 741-2365.

[3] Bill Lambrecht, "World Recoils at Monsanto's Brave New
Crops," ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH December 27, 1998, pg. A1.



**********

OBRL News is a product of the non-profit
Orgone Biophysical Research Lab
Greensprings Research and Educational Center
PO Box 1148, Ashland, Oregon 97520 USA
http://id.mind.net/community/orgonelab/index.htm
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Building upon the discoveries
of the late, great natural scientist, Dr. Wilhelm Reich

To subscribe to OBRL-News, send the message:
        subscribe obrl-news
to the following address:
        [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe, or change to a new email address, firstly:
        unsubscribe obrl-news <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
to the same address above.
Then re-subscribe with your new address.
        subscribe obrl-news <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>





<----  End Forwarded Message  ---->


June

*=======================================================================*
                     The world is coming to an end.
                 Log off and leave in an orderly fashion.
*=======================================================================*
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------*
                        revcoal AT connix DOT com
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------*
 It is UNLAWFUL to send unsolicited commercial email to this email
 address per United States Code Title 47 Sec. 227.  I assess a fee of
 $500.00 US currency for reading and deleting such unsolicited commercial
 email.  Sending such email to this address denotes acceptance of these
 terms.  My posting messages to Usenet neither grants consent to receive
 unsolicited commercial email nor is intended to solicit commercial
 email.
*========================================================================*

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to