Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are making their way into the forefront of our meals. So, why should you care? You may recall the Monsanto commercial a few years ago that told the viewer about a new variety of rice, Golden Rice to be exact; Monsanto scientists had been successful in ‘enriching’ this rice with beta-carotene. The commercial said the golden rice could save the children of developing countries from blindness and death. Syngenta also owns a patent on Golden Rice , their press release claimed one month of a delay in marketing Golden Rice would cause 50,000 children to go blind.

So then, is the agenda to feed the masses and stamp out world hunger as their website states?

Or could there be a darker goal behind the humanitarian smoke screen of genetically modifying our food baskets?

Biotech crops, genetically engineered (GE), genetically modified (GM), Biopharm, Biotech these are just a few of the terms you can expect to hear in the nightly news. And they are all terms that mean the same things: Big money, big control, and big health hazards.

The term can Biotech applies to more than the agricultural sector, it includes the healthcare, industrial, environmental and agricultural sectors of industry. As we take a look at how GMOs are being introduced into our lives through foods be mindful of these other avenues as well.

To begin with it’s important to understand that there is no special regulatory system for GM foods.

The FDA has determined that no safety studies will be necessary. So who does decide if the GMOs produced by the Biotech Corps are harmful or fit for consumption by humans and animals? The answer is the industry itself

All of these companies publish claims their GMOs are safe based on their testing; they say have not generated results or evidence to suggest otherwise. But don’t ask them to review their research papers or test results; this information is protected as ‘confidential business information’.

What is the physical process of creating a GMO? It is the manipulation of an organism’s genes (introducing, eliminating, or changing them) using modern molecular biology techniques.

There are two favored methods of gene insertion. One uses a bacterium to infect the organism with the desired gene trait; the other uses a gene gun to shoot the desired genes into the host.

At the time the new gene is inserted into it’s host an antibiotic resistant protein markers is place inside as well. Antibiotic resistant markers are then used to keep track of the inserted genes. The newly created species now has the ability to survive an application of the specified antibiotic since it contains the protein resistant marker. By applying a dose of the specified antibiotic to all the samples the organisms that have not received the antibiotic resistant marker are killed leaving only the GMOs alive. All the plants grown from each unique gene insertion are called an event because the introduction of the trans genetic material is not repeatable or reproducible as the scientist have no control over where the inserted genes will land, therefore, the new organism (GMO) has to reproduce by it’s own seeds or to be cloned through it’s own tissue cultures.

Look at this quote: GE pigs are successfully being studied that will serve as animal models for human disease, including Alzheimer’s, atherosclerosis, breast cancer, diabetes, and psoriasis. Researcher as BIO member Revivicor Inc., Blacksburg, Va., and at the German institution, the Institute of Farm Animal Genetics in Mariensee, reported that they are successfully producing pigs with up to four transgenes in their genome. And they report that these pigs are normal functioning, happy pigs in every way. Further, Revivicor, whose mission is regenerative medicine, noted that using pigs for replacement human cells, tissues, and organs is the ONLY near-term solution to the current shortage in human organs and tissues. There research includes pigs that provided tissues, tendons, bridge livers, and (in the long-term future) heart, kidney, livers for xenotransplantation. These products, due to the genetic engineering of the pigs, have had the protein eliminated that induces the hyper acute rejection, so rejection will not occur in the human recipient patients. (Hmmm, what about gene transfer? Gene transfer will be covered in the next section.) As one researcher stated, "I can create any pig you want." They are calling this "The Ultimate Pig".

Currently under development are pigs, sheep, goats, chicken fish and cattle. What the article didn’t disclose is what the source of the four transgenes were: animal, vegetable, or mineral…….human?

So then why is this important if they are just enriching, enhancing, or super charging the food we eat or if they are building replacement part for the human body? Big health hazards in the form of environmental contamination and consumption of GMs; not to mention the transference of undesirable genetic material into our bodies. Let’s take a look.

Health Hazards by GMO consumption

As of January 2009 there has only been one human feeding study conducted on genetically modified foods. The study conducted was to determine if transference of antibiotic resistant markers had passed into humans. (The results of this study are given under the next section ‘GM Soy’.)

The British Medical Association (BMA) has issued several interim statementsabout "the lack of robust and thorough search into the potentially harmful effects of GE foodstuffs on human health". Some of the possible health hazards we will be looking at include: transference of antibiotic resistant markers, allergic reactions, hormones imbalances including sterility, weakened immunities, loss of nutrition, and death. Please don’t take this as a complete list of health hazards; only time can provided the long-term information can reveal the full scope of health hazards that are possible.

Transference of antibiotic resistant markers:

GM Soy

The study involved seven human volunteers who had their large intestines removed. These volunteers were to eat GM soy to see if the DNA of the GM soy transferred to the human gut bacteria. Researchers identified that three of the seven volunteers had trans genes from GM soy transferred into their gut bacteria, though none of the gene transfers occurred during the course of the study (so even though it was determined gene transference happened and therefore is possible, since it didn’t happen during the course of the study it doesn’t count?). In volunteers with complete digestive tracts, no recombinant DNA was found. Anti-GM advocates believe the study should prompt additional testing to determine its significance.

Human genes have been added to cows, pigs, rabbits, sheep and fish.

Allergies:

Bt Cotton in India causes allergic reactions of skin, eyes, and upper respiratory tract. The employees at a cotton gin factory of the same Bt Cotton take antihistamines everyday.

After the cotton was harvested, Indian sheep herds grazed continuously on Bt Cotton plants, reports from four villages revealed that about 25% of the sheep died within a week. Included in the collateral damage for this GMO are asubstantial increase in farmers’ suicides in India to Bt Cotton by the increased costs of agricultural desperation.

Bt Corn in the Philippines caused approximately 100 people living next door to a Bt cornfield to develop skin, respiratory, intestinal reactions, and other symptoms while the corn was shedding pollen. The symptoms reappeared in at least four other villages that planted the same corn variety.

A quote from the article Genetically Engineered Organisms Health Implications:"Because no long-term epidemiological studies are in place, we have no evidence showing long-term harm from these foods". How many different ways can you say guinea pig, I believe we’ve just seen an example of one way. I highly recommend reading the whole article at the link provided.

Hormones:

Soy Bean

92 percent of US soybeans in 2008 were a gene-altered harvest. Soy is high in chemicals that mimics human hormones once they are inside the human body. They trigger estrogen receptors but don’t fulfill their role as a true estrogen and at the same time block real estrogen from having access to the receptors. The same process happens in men, but men have far less estrogen in their bodies.

The result for women can be severe menstrual pain, bloating, irregular cycles, clotting. Women reporting these symptoms also reported a decrease of symptoms eating less or no soy. Are the symptoms related directly to the GMO soy? Unfortunately for us any clinical trials or studies that might have been conducted are under the protection of ‘confidential business information’. At this point we can only guess.

Cow’s Milk with rBGH

BGH is a GE drug produced for the purpose of increasing the milk yield of individual cows in the Dairy arena. Production is increased by fifteen to twenty-five percent. Milk from these injected cows have ‘substantially higher amounts of a potent cancer tumor promoter called IGF-1, higher levels of pus, bacteria, and antibiotics. Since 1994, every industrialized country in the world, except for the US, has banned the drug. The average lifespan of a normal cow is fifteen to twenty years, but after only two and a half years of rBGH injections most of the drugged supercharged cows were dead.

Sterility:

Bt LibertyLink Corn Pregnancy rates of sow pigs dropped by 80 percent with most animal having false pregnancies, some delivering bags of water. This event coincided with the times the sows where fed the Bt LibertyLink Corn

RoundUp Ready Soy

Flour from the ground up GMO soybean was added to the female rats diet. Mortality rates of their pups went to 55.3%, the pups were significantly unweight, vital organs of the pups were significantly smaller, and when the offsprings from the GM fed rats were mated together they were unable to conceive.

Weakened Immunities and Death:

Food suppliment L-Tryptophan caused thousand of individuals in the 1980s to contract a disease with a variety of symptoms: swelling, coughs, rashes, physical weakness, pneumonia, breathing difficulties, hardening of the skin, mouth ulcers, nausea, shortness of breath, muscles spasms, visual problems, hair loss, difficulty with concentration or memory, and paralysis; a severely disrupted immune system was suggested by high levels of the white blood cells called eosinophils. According to CDC records the GM supplement sickened or disabled thousands and killed around 100 individuals.

Loss of Nutrition:

Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine

In the commercial market there are no GM foods that are modified to enhance nutrition. Studies of the effects of GM food on nutrition need to take account of the effects of small changes that might result from the consumption of a particular GM food in a balanced diet….it is possible that genetic modification might lead to unpredicted and harmful changes in the nutritional status of the food….

Telegraph.co.uk by Robert Uhlig

Leading scientists say bottle-fed babies could be undernourished if given GM infant formula milk. Dr. Eric Brunner, an epidemiologist at University College, London and one of the report’s authors, said babies dependent solely on formula milk were particularly vulnerable to any nutritional changes.

It’s called the Trojan Gene Effect, when a GMO animal or plant engineered to out perform its not GM competition gains access to the great outdoors a report from the National Research Council warns of what it call serious ecological risk of some genetically modified plants and animals. "the ecological consequences of their escape of release could be serious" it recommends the regulatory agencies require, and enforce, what it calls "bioconfinement" on a case by case basis.

Human genes have been added to cows, pigs, rabbits, sheep and fish.

On the horizon are:

Bananas that produce human vaccines against infectious diseases such as hepatitis B

Fish that mature more quickly using a type 1 growth hormone gene injected into fertilized fish eggs (do you remember the earlier fiasco that Monsanto had when it use HGH with milk cows and the ensuing health issues in the general public?)

Cows that produce spider milk

Plants that produce new plastics with unique properties.

Potatoes with jellyfish genes that glow when they need to be watered

Vegetables with scorpion genes

Tomatoes with fish genes

GM Goats make human breast milk

GM cows to make human breast milk (what happens if the spider milk cows shares some genes with the breast milk cow?)

What happens with the genetic pollution of these plants as they enter our plant and animal food chain?

The potential human health impacts, including allergens, transfer of antibiotic resistant markers (many speculate this is where the super viruses are coming from that are resistant to so many antibiotics) and in general there is possible an unlimited number of unknown health impacts from these new SuperFoods

Environmental Hazard

Genetically engineered crops and animals are alive: living, breathing, and moving throughout the ecosystem of the world, unlike toxins and pollutants that cleaned from the environment or dissipate over time. Once these organisms are released into the environment they can never be recalled, never be rounded up, their effects can never be nullified.

Genetic pollution or pollen drift has already been seen in many places as the genetic materials from GMOs travel by wind, insects, birds, or trucks to the fields of organic farmers polluting their organic crops with genetic materials, causing the loss of their organic certifications. And spins this, not only are theBiotech Corps responsible for the wind riding pollen drifts, the Biotechs are taking the organic farmers to court. You see, the subsequent generation from the crossing of the organic and GMO has the genetic markers of the GMO and legally cannot be replanted without licensing permission of the Biotech Corp that includes licensing fees because of their patent of the GM genome. In addition they are owed percentage of the income yielded from the crops with the markers (royalties). Most of the time unless the organic farmer is reapplying for organic certification he is not even aware of the cross over. So, even if such countries as the US were to attempt to label GM crops with some sort of regulation the mixing of the GM crops with non-GM products confounds labeling attempts.

In the agriculture and natural environment, GMOs and trans genetic genome will bump into hundreds of non-target species that serve important ecological functions. Take the example of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready crops, which have been specifically genetically engineered to receive massive doses of the herbicide Roundup. Farmers can soak the crop and the land it’s planted in with the herbicide killing the weeds, but leaving the crops. (There are almost 250 million GM acres worldwide which require Roundup, this is a lot of profit for Monsanto). A glyphosate (Roundup) resistant variation of palmer amaranth, commonly known as pigweed followed the widely spread use of Roundup and is now reeking havoc in the SE United States. But the resistance to Roundup has not been contained to pigweed; it has shown up in water hemp, horseweed, Johnson grass and giant ragweed. (Wow, now we have the creation of genetically engineered SuperWeeds.)

Or consider the caddisflies that are a source of food for certain species of fish and amphibians. The caddisflies growth rates can be effected by fifty percent by GM pollens entering their waterways and there has been a significant increased in their death rates, this is phenomenon is called damage to non target species and can include beneficial insects (think honey bees), wildlife and micro organisms effecting soil fertility.

Also at risk are the creation of new plant viruses and damage to biological diversity as the new species of GMO continues its travel through out the eco system.

Now let’s apply this to a situation where, if given their way; scientists will GE animal to make antibodies. In the case of fighting infectious disease, GE animal-made antibodies can be produced from animals that have had the human antibody genes transferred to them. These animals can then be vaccinated against human disease and antibodies can be collected from their blood and used for treating diseases in humans. Other examples include making animal organs compatible with humans. Currently ATryn, is a human pharmaceutical, anti-blood clotting factor; produced in the milk of GE goats.

So, the process is put human antibody genes in the animals, vaccinate the animals, collect the antibody genes from the animal and put them in humans. What will happen in the offspring of the recipient of the GE antibodies? Will there be a genetic deposit made into the human recipient of animal genome? Or visa versa? What will be the SuperByProduct this time? It has long been believed a possible source of MadCow Disease (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, BSE) comes from giving to the cattle food that includes left over ground up parts from cattle slaughters. When in our food chain we as humans begin to consume animals with human antibodies, what will be our outcome? Human genes have been added to cows, pigs, rabbits, sheep and fish.

Big Money, Big Control

Let’s look at just one of the big Biotech Corps operating today.

Monsanto, one of the producers of the infamous Agent Orange of Viet Nam and we know how well that went with 400, 000 reported deaths and disabilities, and 500,000 reported children born with birth defects, not to mention the cases ofcancer and neurological disorders. The companies first product was the coal tar based saccharin, it is also the producer of the excitotoxin aspartame developed as a medicine for stomach ulcers now used as a sweetener (NutraSweet) , andPCB. Remember the Hudson River incident? Monsanto an agricultural company shows in their public financial record for the 2008 fiscal year a 11.3 billion US dollar revenue.

Here are a few our Biotech company public financial records:

Abbott Laboratories– summary of operations: net sales 2008 $29.5 billion

AstraZeneca – $31.6 million in net sales

Bayer Group – 32.9 million euro in net sales

This is just the tip of the iceberg. The directory at Bio.org boasts a membership list of over 1,200 members world wide. Some of the names that would equal net sales as big as these listed above would be: Dow, DuPont, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, Gloucester Parmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen, Merck, Norvartis, Pfizer, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Syngenta, Wyeth; just to name a few most people would recognize. Apply the average net sales of the three previous corporations, roughly 30 billion times the 16 corporations listed equals a 480 billion dollar industry. This is 1.5 % of it’s 1,200 membership list.

According to a report by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA), the Global Status of Commercialized Bitoech/GM Crops: 2008, 13.3 million farmers in 25 countries are using agricultural biotechnology today. Ninety percent of these resource-poor farmers in 15 developing countries. In the United States more than 154 million acres of biotech crops were planted in 2008

Remember the Golden Rice we opened the article with? Let’s take a closer look at it now with new eyes. As stated earlier in the article: In the commercial market there are no GM foods that are modified to enhance nutrition. According to an article by Greenpeace a simple calculation based on the product developers’ own figures show as adult would have to eat at least 12 times the normal intake of 300 grams to get the daily recommended amount of provitamin A. Greenpeace calculation show that an adult would have to eat at least 3.7 kilograms of dry weight rice, which results in about nine kilograms of cooked rice. Incidentally most of these developing countries that are being targeted for the distribution of the Golden Rice have an abundant supply of beta-carotene available in the form of indigenous produce (i.e. Papaya or red palm oil to give two examples).

Where is the food supply headed? There appears to be an agenda of pushing onto the public that there is only one option left and that option is the management of the co-existence of GM and non-GM. The inevitable co-existence will lead to a two- stream system of global food and agriculture. A GM free niche market for the very rich and a GM polluted supply for the rest of the world with a minute number of corporations controlling both streams.

Study after study demonstrates the impossibility of practicing GM free agriculture next to GM agriculture. This is why the co-existence negotiations are actually about thresholds (what are "acceptable" levels of contamination) and liability (who is responsible for the inevitable contaminations that will occur).Under current laws in countries like the United States and Canada contamination of organic crops by GM crops will mean increased corporate control.

Remember the organic farmer who lost his certification by GM contamination and then was forced to purchase licensing and pay royalties to the Biocorp? Who knows if the ‘black market’ for Gm crops is part of the Biocorp agenda or someone else’s greed. In the face of widespread smuggling of Roundup Ready soybeans from Argentina to Paraguay, the Paraguayan Minister of Agriculture and Livestock said he was inclined to free-up transgenetic production because he was convinced that there is no alternative under the current circumstances. Once initial contamination is obtained the big companies quickly move in to squash the black market and take control as in Argentina and Brazil. Monsanto used the smuggling of GM soybeans to its advantage, working with the illegal GM soy producers to pressure government to legalize the crop. Once the GM soy became legal in Brazil, Monsanto moved in to put an end to the black market.

With the government offering an amnesty to farmers who register their crops as GM soy, Monsanto worked out an agreement with certain producer organizations and soybean crushers, cooperatives and exporters to force Brazilian farmers to pay royalties. Monsanto plans to extend the same system to Argentina. This was a cleverly timed contribution to a long running seed industry push for "extended royalties" and it paid off. In early 2004, the government reconstituted its seed police and announced a proposed global royalty fund that forces farmers who can’t prove that they grew their crops with purchased certified seeds to pay a tax on their wheat and soybean sales. The government will administer the tax and the seed industry will pocket it. From the organic farmers to the developing countries Biocrops are actively making efforts to monopolize the food agricultural industry. By hook, by crook, by black market and government bribes.

BIO (Biotechnology Industry Organization) represents more than 1,200 biotechnology companies, academic institutions, state biotechnology centers and related organizations across the United States and in more than thirty other nations. BIO members are involved in the research and development of innovative healthcare, agricultural, industrial and environmental biotechnology products. BIO also produces the BIO International Convention, the world’s largest gathering of the biotechnology industry, along with industry-leading investor and partnering meetings held around the world.

Here are some of their hopes and dreams for the coming year :

Investors anticipate a surge of mergers and acquisitions this year, led by large-cap companies taking over smaller ones with promising pipelines and thus giving a general boost to valuation in the sector.

Expected are advancements in the clinic and some FDA approvals that will serve as catalysts for the sector’s positive performance.

An expected BLURRING OF LINES BETWEEN BIOTECH AND PHARMA. As leading drug makers continue to try to shore up their development pipelines by investing in biotech companies or by building their own large molecule capabilities, the lines that have long separated pharma from biotech are blurring. Indeed, in recent presentations, several major pharmaceutical companies have specifically highlighted their biotech operations, including Eli Lilly (which devoted an entire segment of its December 2008 Investment Community Update to its "Biotech strategy and pipeline"), Merck (which announced the formation of its BioVentures unit in December 2008), and Pfizer (which repeatedly emphasized in its January 2009 merger announcement how the Wyeth acquisition will create "the world‟s premier biopharmaceutical company"). Note, however, that making a public commitment to integrating the two research disciplines does not guarantee successful execution. Moreover, investors may not necessarily accept or even desire the combination.

Investors are eager to see significant operational improvements made inside the FDA. When asked about product approval respondents assign more blame to the FDA than to the companies. Nearly three-quarters of the survey respondents point to the FDA setting higher safety barriers, while more than half state that the FDA simply lacks sufficient resources to execute the review and approval process. By comparison, only one-quarter indicates that ineffective R&D (research and development) is the reason for the limited number of approvals.

As a result, investors are keenly focused on potential improvements in FDA operations.

http://www.panamalaw.org