> >From the "Just in case you're concerned about food safety, corparate and
> governement ethics, etc." -
> Here are three messages from the Dairy Action Discussion list in which
> information is relayed about what may be some unethical/immoral actions by
> the Monsanto company, concerningf their Genetically Modified Organism
(GMO)
> called "Round-up Ready" crops. The issue of human safety is at question
> here, also. It also goes in to the issue of whether or not the
> controversial injectable, genetically engineered hormone reportedly used
by
> 20% of the nation's dairy farmers - rbGH/rbST - was given adequate
> scientific scrutiny as to human safety. There are journal citations to
> follow-up.
>
>
>
>
> >Subject: Re: [DairyAction] Monsanto strong arming Ag industry
> >
> >From: "John Bunting" <bunting@dmcom.net>
> >
> >DAD,
> >>
> >> Below is an interesting story from Canada about Monsanto strong arming
> >> the ag industry. There is even some unsubstantiated claims of Monsanto
> >> spraying Roundup on soybean fields without authorization to see if
their
> >> Roundup Ready seed was being used. There is a small part on rBST
> >> towards the end of the story.
> >>
> >> http://www.canbus.com/magazine_items/oct08_99_frankenstein.html
> >>
> >> Mike Bernhardt
> >> Dairy Farmer
> >> Park City MT
> >
> >I think this is the important part of this story:
> >
> >Perhaps the best hope for injecting consumer confidence in GM food in
North
> >America is reminding consumers that it passed through the FDA and Health
> >Canada approval process. But while erecting the regulatory system as a
> >monument to GM food's safety is the industry's greatest strength, it's
also
> >a glaring weakness. For while the industry maintains the decision to
> >classify GM food as substantially equivalent to non-GM food was grounded
in
> >science, recent leaked documents show that some FDA scientists had
concerns
> >about approving GM food, that they weren't convinced it was safe. Not
only
> >is the FDA now being sued by the Washington, DC-based Center for Food
> >Safety, but University of Minnesota ecology professor Philip Regal, an
> >expert in the field, sees more trouble in the offing. When it came to
> >testing GM foods, the government "just gave up," Regal says. "The
> >technological problems of testing were too difficult. A whole range of
GMOs
> >[genetically modified organisms] were coming in and they had no way to
test
> >for them. The expense would be astronomical. The general idea was, 'We'll
> >just have to risk it. If the people want progress they're going to have
to
> >be guinea pigs.' "
> >
> >
> >John Bunting
> >Dairy Farmer
> >Treadwell, NY
>
>
> Reply-to: DairyAction@onelist.com
> Subject: Re: [DairyAction] Monsanto strong arming Ag industry
>
> From: John Piwowar <vmdairy@usaor.net>
>
> At 11:50 AM 1999.10.24 -0400, John bunting quoted a document which read,
in
> part:
> > For while the industry maintains the decision to
> >classify GM food as substantially equivalent to non-GM food was grounded
in
> >science, recent leaked documents show that some FDA scientists had
concerns
> >about approving GM food, that they weren't convinced it was safe.
>
> John and DAD,
> I'm totally baffled here. What are the safety concerns of food made from
> GM plants or animals?
>
>
>
> John S. Piwowar
> 127 Bitner Road
> Uniontown, Pa. 15401-9806
> vmdairy@usaor.net
>
>
> From: "John Bunting" <bunting@dmcom.net>
>
> DAD,
>
> > From: John Piwowar <vmdairy@usaor.net>
> >
> > At 11:50 AM 1999.10.24 -0400, John bunting quoted a document which read,
> in
> > part:
> > > For while the industry maintains the decision to
> > >classify GM food as substantially equivalent to non-GM food was
grounded
> in
> > >science, recent leaked documents show that some FDA scientists had
> concerns
> > >about approving GM food, that they weren't convinced it was safe.
> >
> > John and DAD,
> > I'm totally baffled here. What are the safety concerns of food made
from
> > GM plants or animals?
> >
> >
> >
> > John S. Piwowar
>
> I don't know what if any the specific safety concerns referred to are. I
do
> know that the safety of rBST was not based on any science. It was based
on
> very little and dated study on naturally occuring bovine growth hormone
> injected into humans. This study was limited to observing changes in
growth
> of the subjects. FDA deemed that rBST was substantially the same as
> naturally occuring bovine growth hormone and therefore with limited study
of
> that made the *assumption* no further study was needed. I think it is
fair
> to say that any scientist would objectively have concerns over the safety
on
> decisions made by *assumptions*.
>
> You might check the following:
> "Safety of Bovine Growth Hormone," SCIENCE Vol. 251 (January 18, 1991),
pg.
> 256, and FDA responded in SCIENCE Vol. 251 (January 18, 1991), pgs.
256-257.
>
> T. B. Mepham, "Public health implications of bovine somatotrophin [sic]
use
> in dairying: discussion paper," JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF MEDICINE
> Vol. 85 (December 1992), pgs. 736-739.
>
> Melvin M. Grumbach and others, "NIH Technology Assessment Conference
> Statement on Bovine Somatotropin," JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL
> ASSOCIATION Vol. 265 No. 11 (March 20, 1991), pgs. 1423-1425.
>
> FDA seems to have made a decision to risk using the public as guinea pigs
> with no *contol* on the experiment. Some would like to think that the EU
> opposition is grounded upon, trade barriers, emotional reaction on BSE or
> delaying tactic. I think a careful reading of their study demonstrates a
> totally different approach to risk/benefit analysis. There is no clear
> "public" benefit to rBST and the risk continues to be unknown. A basic
> scientific rule is: "Absence of proof does not constitute proof of
absence".
>
>
> John Bunting
> Dairy Farmer
> Treadwell, NY
>
> at the end of each message to DAD.
>
>
> +Peace,
> Willie
>
> Willie Gibson
> Extension Specialist - Sustainable Agriculture
> University of Vermont Extension PHONE: 802/223-2389 ext.16
> 617 Comstock Road Suite 5 FAX: 802/223-6500
> Berlin, VT 05602-9194 EMAIL: Willie.Gibson@uvm.edu
>
> WEB SITES TO EXPLORE......
> The University of Vermont Extension Homepage
> http://ctr.uvm.edu/ext/
> The Vermont Crops and Soils Homepage
> http://pss.uvm.edu/vtcrops/index.html
> The UVM Agricultural Testing Lab Homepage
> http://pss.uvm.edu/ag_testing/index.htm
> Center for Sustainable Agriculture at UVM
> http://www.uvm.edu/~susagctr/welcome.html
>
> "I can do what you can't do, and you can do what I can't do. Together
> we can do great things."
> - Mother Teresa of Calcutta
>
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail