Monsanto GM Corn Causing Organ Failure In Rats Study: Everything You Need To Know

Huffington Post   |  Katherine Goldstein First Posted: 01-19-10 11:08 AM   |   Updated: 01-19-10 01:50 PM

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS
What's Your Reaction?
Monsanto
Three types of Monsanto genetically modified corn are under scrutiny in the wake of a new study published by the International Journal Of Biological Sciences which found that rats ingesting the corn were subject to statistically significant amounts of organ toxicity. These three types -- Mon 863, insecticide-producing Mon 810, and Roundup® herbicide-absorbing NK 603 -- have been approved for consumption in the US and several countries in Europe.

The finding that corn produced by one of the world's agricultural giants could cause organ failure has been met with obvious concern by food activists and consumers alike. It's not the first bout of negative publicity for Monsanto, which has been vilified for everything from producing Agent Orange, intimidating farmers, using aggressive tactics to squeeze out competition, pressuring farmers to be dependent on their products, and strongly promoting the use of genetically modified seeds here and abroad. It has been negatively portrayed in films such as "Food, Inc." and "The World According To Monsanto".

While some groups like Change.org, see this study as a rallying cry for regulatory action and boycott, others on both sides of the GMO issue think the study results itself are not clear and shouldn't be accepted wholeheartedly. The IJBS is not a peer-reviewed journal, and the work was not an independent analysis of the effects of the GM corn on rats. Rather, it was a full interpretation of all of the samples of rats in the 90-day study that Monsanto itself sponsored. After analyzing the data, the European researchers came to the conclusion:

"Effects were mostly concentrated in kidney and liver function, the two major diet detoxification organs, but in detail differed with each GM type. In addition, some effects on heart, adrenal, spleen and blood cells were also frequently noted. As there normally exists sex differences in liver and kidney metabolism, the highly statistically significant disturbances in the function of these organs, seen between male and female rats, cannot be dismissed as biologically insignificant as has been proposed by others. We therefore conclude that our data strongly suggests that these GM maize varieties induce a state of hepatorenal toxicity.[...] These substances have never before been an integral part of the human or animal diet and therefore their health consequences for those who consume them, especially over long time periods are currently unknown."


Discover notes that Greenpeace, an activist environmental group sponsored the scientists' research -- they had to sue to obtain the raw data in the first place, and that the IJBS is relatively obscure. Leading nutrition professor Dr. Marion Nestle wrote on her blog about the study, "I found the paper extremely difficult to read, in part because it is written in exceptionally dense and opaque language, and in part because it presents the data in especially complicated tables and figures." Monsanto claims that the study employed "non-traditional statistical methods to reassess toxicology data from studies conducted with MON 863, MON 810 and NK603 corn varieties" and that the IJBS paper reaches "unsubstantiated conclusions."


The IJBS study itself strenuously suggests more testing over two years rather than 90 days to evaluate the long-term health impacts, and by independent researchers rather than Monsanto itself. The study also points out that Monsanto conducted the study only once rather than multiple times, and only tested one species -- rats -- and emphasizes that testing on more mammals of this GM maize is needed to reach any kind of conclusion on safety. This maize is used as both animal feed and for human consumption.

According to the FDA's website, the agency concludes that genetic engineering that occurred in the maize varieties, MON 810, NK603, MON 863 was not different enough from past approved products and did not need a pre-market review. The FDA essentially takes Monsanto's word that the company had done adequate testing to ensure its safety, as shown clearly in this letter. Several countries in Europe, such as Germany and France, have recently banned GM crops, specifically MON 810 after it had been approved for consumption in the European Union.

Furthermore, there are no laws requiring companies to label if their products contain GMOs. Even food labeled "Organic" that is processed with multiple ingredients must only be 95% organic, leaving loopholes for obscure ingredients that are genetically modified to be included. HuffPost Blogger and Eco Etiquette columnist Jennifer Grayson has written a comprehensive article detailing the ways to avoid genetically modified foods in light of the fact that there are no labeling requirements in the US.

So the facts are as follows: We eat corn and corn derivatives that have been genetically modified, which has been banned for being unsafe in other countries -- the FDA has not done independent testing on the health effects of at least three types of corn that we are eating, and have instead taken Monsanto's word for the fact that they are safe. Monsanto resisted releasing their data to independent researchers -- environmental groups had to sue to get it. Once it was released and analyzed by one group of scientists, they wrote a dense study in a non-peer reviewed journal and found statistically significant amounts of organ failure in the rats in Monsanto's own study. Consumers often have no way of knowing clearly if they are eating genetically modified food.


The FDA did not return calls for comment.

Get HuffPost Green On Facebook and Twitter

Know something we don't? E-mail us at Huffpostgreen@huffingtonpost.com

Three types of Monsanto genetically modified corn are under scrutiny in the wake of a new study published by the International Journal Of Biological Sciences which found that rats ingesting the corn w...
Three types of Monsanto genetically modified corn are under scrutiny in the wake of a new study published by the International Journal Of Biological Sciences which found that rats ingesting the corn w...
Around the Web:

Monsanto ~ Home

Report Corrections
 
Comments
492
Pending Comments
1

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6  Next ›  Last »  (6 pages total)
- Whatevah I'm a Fan of Whatevah 35 fans permalink
photo

A lot of folks in this thread seem to think I am spewing Monsanto propaganda when I say that the anti-science hysteria here is a load of poo.

OK, here goes. Here's a position paper written for the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The author is an independent expert who was assigned the task of explaining this issue in language that laymen could grasp. She did a great job of explaining what citizens need to know to make informed judgments about this important science.

It's a little dry, and it is a few years old, but it is a completely accurate and objective picture of the real story.

www.aaas.org/spp/rd/ch13.pdf

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 07:58 AM on 1/21/2010
- 3dtrix I'm a Fan of 3dtrix 247 fans permalink

I see you have no trouble picking the low-hanging fruit, but have failed to respond to my assertion that the most dangerous aspect of Monsanto is its business practices - which definitely employ a ruthless monopolistic model and are a global threat not only to agriculture but good governance. People ARE passionate about corporate domination of the food industry - and they have good reason to distrust the never-ending smiley-face public relations bs that corporations spew. I am as pro-science as any man alive, and extremely resistant to hype and hysteria - but only a fool would assert that what was once accepted as "scientifically proven" to be benign has never later been proven to be toxic. Many people who are passionate on this subject fail to realize that EVERY SINGLE commercial food crop grown on earth has been genetically modified - that is, bred, into its present form - yet that is a far cry from gene-splicing which indisputably DOES have potential for as much harm as good - and the corporate "ownership" of DNA. Frankly, you come off as irrational as many others here...

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 12:25 PM on 1/21/2010
- clopper I'm a Fan of clopper permalink

He won't respond because his goal here is to keep throwing new "information" and half truths out there to distract from the real issues in the article. For every pro gmo study there is an anti gmo study, only time will prove the value or danger of gmo's. Insulting those who disagree with him or labeling them as anti-science is intended to rile up the crowd and keep the arguments going in circles, becoming less and less focused.

The issue of the aggressive and unsafe practices these big ag corporations have undertaken are not debatable. They are not trying to feed the world or save the environment. They are trying to gain control of food production and many of us feel that access to food is a human right and not one to be given over to corporate (amoral) interests, especially when there is every indication that their practices may jeopardize future food security.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 03:39 PM on 1/21/2010
- rkreeves I'm a Fan of rkreeves permalink

" Even food labeled "Organic" that is processed with multiple ingredients must only be 95% organic "

... This is ONLY TRUE if you rely on the "USDA Certified Organic" label (thank you FDA). Third-party independent certifiers such as QAI, CCOF, etc. do not allow ANY amount of non-organic material in products receiving their approval. Read your labels and reject USDA Organic.

BTW, are my organic organs worth more than non-organic organs? If I needed an organ might I request an organic one? If "food" is ruining organs, will there be any organs left for those who need them? (Which will be most all of us, apparently). And why exactly are we diabetic and obese? Nobody knows yet (at least not until we see the REST of Monsanto's hidden data).

If there is any truth to this "non-peer reviewed" assessment of Monsanto's own study can you imagine jury selection? There is no venue in the entire country whose jury pool will be without the organ-failing, diabetic-obese who will be part of the class-action lawsuit. The entire country will be biased, therefore Monsanto will be able to get the suit dismissed!

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 01:21 PM on 1/20/2010
- ReedYoung I'm a Fan of ReedYoung 194 fans permalink
photo

Well, about that fair trial, the dirt-worshiping hippies who would never eat anything genetically engineered will be unaffected by Monsanto's poisonous products, but only because we already knew it's poison!

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 05:38 PM on 1/20/2010
- IndianaJohn I'm a Fan of IndianaJohn 6 fans permalink
photo

The USDA is hosting a forum on sustainable agriculture:

http://www.usda.gov/oce/forum/

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 12:45 PM on 1/20/2010
- Mum I'm a Fan of Mum 49 fans permalink

Thanks for the link. I took a look at the information detailing the speakers and the sessions. It appears they will be addressing some vital issues: food safety and nutritional issues, sustainability, organics, and rural revitalization, to name a few. I can't attend, but I'm hoping to be able to obtain copies of some of the papers that are being presented.

I'll have to admit I wasn't totally thrilled with Vilsack's appointment to head the USDA. But he seems have done a more than decent job so far in staffing the department, and if this forum is any indication, he seems to be placing an emphasis on science in the interest of public policy at least as much as, and possibly (hopefully) more than, agribusiness and its lobbyist leeches.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 04:20 AM on 1/21/2010
- forthurst I'm a Fan of forthurst permalink

"insecticide-producing Mon 810" - How clever! Monsanto has developed a poisonous plant, just like thousands of other species that our ancestors found were not fit to eat. But wait, Monsanto wants the government to force you to ingest this poison because although it might kill or injure you it is excellent for the shareholders of Monsanto. The best part of it is you won't be able to tell whether you are eating it or not because intermediaries who process this will not have to inform you.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 AM on 1/20/2010
- Whatevah I'm a Fan of Whatevah 35 fans permalink
photo

The plant is only poisonous to insects.

Cows, pigs, chickens and humans have no trouble digesting this stuff safely. That's the whole point.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 01:44 PM on 1/20/2010
- mtwa I'm a Fan of mtwa permalink

Please ignore this as*hole. He has been asked to go away but refuses. He continually keeps commenting on other people's posts with his imagined superiority. I think he has a mental problem.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 02:12 PM on 1/20/2010
- ckmotorka I'm a Fan of ckmotorka permalink

Keep telling yourself that.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 02:18 PM on 1/20/2010
- cabinetmaniac I'm a Fan of cabinetmaniac 8 fans permalink
photo

WHATEVAH!

:-]

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 04:38 PM on 1/20/2010
- awlff I'm a Fan of awlff permalink

The fact is the toxins over a period of time build up in your organs.That is why Monsanto won't do long range studies and will attempt to hide any test results they do have.That is the whole point of Mosanto buying off government officials and the fda and usda being muzzled and neutered.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 05:30 PM on 1/20/2010
- ReedYoung I'm a Fan of ReedYoung 194 fans permalink
photo

"The plant is only poisonous to insects.
Cows, pigs, chickens and humans have no trouble digesting this stuff safely."

Right, it's not the cows, pigs, chickens and humans who are destroyed by GM corn, just their livers and kidneys.

Look, we all know this is only a preliminary finding and even Greenpeace did not assert this is a conclusion, but an indication of need for more research. And there is no sane objection to that.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 05:31 PM on 1/20/2010
- awlff I'm a Fan of awlff permalink

okay now I get it. Whateve is educated in or knowledgeable about science and technology,a writer yet.And he has time to disabuse the ignorant greeners about their biases against mass food processing and distribution juggernaut that is American food suppliers.
Well yes I do not intimately know the biology of crops.But feel free to correct someone for speaking in lay persons idiom.What people mean by genetically modified seed. Yeah that's the crux of disconnect.I'll tell them how incorrect they are. Aren't I one smart
writer.Heck all you Americans are dumb.

There are more than one kind of ignorant.There are the kind of ignorances that despite how much someone understands something they think they have a duty to correct other peoples beliefs.
How much do you know about big business paying off regulators and government officials? If Monsanto was in the business of life saving why does it act like a Mafia
Don hiding his ties to prostitution and drug dealing.
Science I have no bias against.Big business telling people to eat poison and then expecting a thank you and total world market .I have a bias against that.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 06:04 PM on 1/20/2010
- totaldisbelief I'm a Fan of totaldisbelief 41 fans permalink

The loss of Biodiversity is not good.
To let a corporation control seeds and planting is not good.
To let an industry take over nature is not good.
To cater to Monsanto is not good.
You are what you eat and good health starts here.
If you want to control health care costs ; then you must begin with diet and exercise.
Support your local small farmers and growers ...go organic....care about what you eat.
Learn to plant a garden and enjoy that bounty.
Get your hands back into the earth.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 11:47 AM on 1/20/2010
- DocSkull I'm a Fan of DocSkull 33 fans permalink
photo

While you are correct that the journal in which this study was published is not peer reviewed, Whatevah has relied on a blog for his rebuttal. That too isn't peer reviewed.

The safety of ingesting GMOs has not been very well studied, but that may be beside the point. They are very, very harmful to the environment and the economic well-being of food producers. It isn't necessary for them to kill you as well in order to reject them and the people who seek to excessively profit from a fundamental human need.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 10:42 AM on 1/20/2010
- Whatevah I'm a Fan of Whatevah 35 fans permalink
photo

I would like to thank Huffington Post for publishing this. The comments that follow are amazing. Anyone who doesn't understand the depth of ignorance of the American public need only dig into these anti-science screeds. This is a truly monumental pile of manure.

My only quibble is with the headline. A post revealing "everything you need to know" about this "study" would have mentioned that every peer reviewed journal that looked at this paper rejected it as poorly done bunk. The authors (who are backed by Greenpeace, not a university or government) finally had to print their "work" in a non-peer reviewed journal.

Discover Magazine has a more detailed article at the following: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2010/01/15/gm-corn-organ-failure-lots-of-sensationalism-few-facts/

A warning: there are a lot of big words in that article. Some of the commenters to this post may want to ask for help from their mommies and daddies.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 09:40 AM on 1/20/2010
- pointy I'm a Fan of pointy 5 fans permalink
photo

How much does Monsanto pay you? I suggest you do a little reading yourself to understand the complexities of the situation involving food production and corporate control. if the above mentioned study is true or false doesn't really matter, gmo's and those who push them are putting many lives at risk and making a big profit by doing so knowingly!

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 10:21 AM on 1/20/2010
- ScienceFTW I'm a Fan of ScienceFTW 83 fans permalink
photo

Protip:

When you say stuff like,"How much does Monsanto pay you?" most sane human beings read it as "How do you like my tin foil hat?".

Also I suggest you do some reading into GE crops. They have saved hundreds of millions of men, women and children from starving to death.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 10:31 AM on 1/20/2010
- Whatevah I'm a Fan of Whatevah 35 fans permalink
photo

Here we go again.

For the bazillionth time, I have no connection to any corporation, including Monsanto.

I am a writer specializing in the history of science and technology. I have followed this field for the last 30 years. I actually understand how this technology works, the benefits and risks, and the business implications involved. I've interviewed the top players on both sides.

I confess that I am shilling for myself when I point out that more information can be found in my upcoming book, "Inventions That Changed The World," coming this fall to a fine bookstore near you for a mere $29.95.

It will make a GREAT Christmas gift for all your loved ones, and it might spare them the embarrassment of making some of the nutty statements like the ones founds in the comments in this thread.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 10:37 AM on 1/20/2010
- DocSkull I'm a Fan of DocSkull 33 fans permalink
photo

Whatevah says he is a fervent protector of Monsanto for free. It is a good thing because Monsanto tends to lose those cases where they are charged with making false statements about their products.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 10:47 AM on 1/20/2010
- grn1 I'm a Fan of grn1 11 fans permalink

peer review is shut down and destroyed in the US

Go to psrast.org

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 11:17 AM on 1/20/2010
- totaldisbelief I'm a Fan of totaldisbelief 41 fans permalink

so how long have you worked for Monsanto?
you're way too verbous and smug sounding to have a real clue about nature.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 11:50 AM on 1/20/2010
- Whatevah I'm a Fan of Whatevah 35 fans permalink
photo

The word you are searching for is "informed."

Verbose? Smug? No. Simply informed.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 04:17 PM on 1/20/2010
- Mum I'm a Fan of Mum 49 fans permalink

PLEASE PROVIDE LINKS to "every peer reviewed journal that looked at this paper [which] rejected it as poorly done bunk." If you can't provide the links, then we will know you for what you seem to be - a Monsanto mouthpiece.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 04:33 AM on 1/21/2010
- themainpoint I'm a Fan of themainpoint 71 fans permalink

Here's a short film I found about Monsanto and genetically modified foods:
http://www.personalgrowthcourses.net/video/gmo_food_genetically_modified.php

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 08:19 AM on 1/20/2010
- Whatevah I'm a Fan of Whatevah 35 fans permalink
photo

The claim that genetic engineers can patent seeds because of some evil corporate plot is nuts.

These rights stem from a 19th century effort to protect the Luther Burbank, the most brilliant genetic manipulator ever. He introduced HUNDREDS of new fruits and vegetables starting in 1874, with the amazing Russet Potato. Like peaches? Nectarines? Plums? Burbank invented them.

Burbank struggled financially because competitors bought his seeds, grew his plants, them flooded the market with pirated copies. This nightmare led a bunch of Burbank’s friends (especially Henry Ford and Tom Edison) to lobby congress for patent reform. Naturally, congress didn't act until four years after Burbank died in 1926,

Patents expire after 14 years. Monsanto’s patent on RoundUp is long gone. RoundUp Ready seed goes generic in 2014; you can bet that Monsanto’s execs are wetting themselves over the prospect of farmers saving these seeds! But that’s the deal they have to accept in order to get any patent protection at all.

Despite what you hear from folks who have a fit at the mention of Monsanto, we consumers are much better off because of these laws. All of those glorious foods found in farmers’ markets come from genetic manipulators whose work has passed into the public domain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther_Burbank

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 07:49 AM on 1/20/2010
- yemaya I'm a Fan of yemaya 68 fans permalink

It's morally wrong to own the food supply like Monsanto does. farmers have been genetically modifying our food sources for thousands of years. We never needed any stinking engineers to do it. It was the corporations who began fiddling around w/the idea of pest resistant food. Farmers used to grow our food w/out this crap a long time ago.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 10:14 AM on 1/20/2010
- ScienceFTW I'm a Fan of ScienceFTW 83 fans permalink
photo

actually wrong. GE crops were necessary, unless you are under the belief that hundreds of millions dying from starvation is ok.

While I'm not a fan of monsanto they are actually just protecting their work. They've made modifications that increase yields, are pest, herbicide resistant - farmers are going to monsanto because it works. If monsanto didn't protect their work, there would be no money in it for them. Farmers are still free to grow food without this "crap".

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 10:25 AM on 1/20/2010
- DocSkull I'm a Fan of DocSkull 33 fans permalink
photo

GMOs are certainly not necessary. We've managed to feed ourselves with agriculture for thousands of years and there is no lack of arable land.

GMOs are used for commercial crops in order to extract additional profit and take advantage of poor government policies which pay subsidies for per acre yields rather than safe practices and quality food.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 10:51 AM on 1/20/2010
- jsijason I'm a Fan of jsijason 34 fans permalink
photo

Burbank did not INVENT peaches, nectarines and plums.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 03:31 PM on 1/20/2010
- Whatevah I'm a Fan of Whatevah 35 fans permalink
photo

. . . uh . . . yes, he did.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 03:59 PM on 1/20/2010
- DocSkull I'm a Fan of DocSkull 33 fans permalink
photo

I don't know about nectarines, but peaches and plums have been around for centuries.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 06:44 PM on 1/20/2010
- Mum I'm a Fan of Mum 49 fans permalink

"All of those glorious foods found in farmers' markets comes from genetic manipulators whose work has passed into the public domain."

I plan to take this statement with me to farmers' markets and to my farmer friends. I think they will find it amusing.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 04:43 AM on 1/21/2010
- 3dtrix I'm a Fan of 3dtrix 247 fans permalink

You are so steeped in the correctness of your position vis-a-vis corporate ownership of life forms that you simply assume that there is a fundamental right of those who develop a variation to "own" it. I have deep admiration for Burbank and others of his kind who vastly improved the various stocks of plant - AND animal - life we enjoy and exploit, but it doesn't follow for me that one who has developed a variant "owns" it. Does - or should - a person or non-human entity (corporate or government) "own" German Shepards? Arabian horses? There are other business models available to those who wish to derive an income from their efforts to improve various genetic strains than to assert monopolistic possession of it...

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 12:46 PM on 1/21/2010
- Whatevah I'm a Fan of Whatevah 35 fans permalink
photo

Actually, global patent law does indeed support ownership rights of plant inventors.

The concept is especially strong in the U.S. Constitution.

Feel free to hold a contrary opinion. However, this post is supposed to be about whether GMOs are safe. I'm not all the interested in the business stuff.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 02:55 PM on 1/21/2010
- rougebaisers I'm a Fan of rougebaisers 26 fans permalink
photo

The revolving door from Monsanto to the FDA and back is the main reason our nation is being poisoned for profit. It is no great mystery why all cancers are on the dramatic rise in this country. They are genetically engineering us into being the most unhealthy country on this planet. At some point they must be held accountable along with the politicians who allow this madness to continue.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 06:19 AM on 1/20/2010
- totaldisbelief I'm a Fan of totaldisbelief 41 fans permalink

I for one have zero confidence in the FDA...they are nothing more than corporate shills.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 AM on 1/20/2010
- TN I'm a Fan of TN 32 fans permalink

Well, I'll be going down to the farmers market for sure. Put them out of business, help the little guy.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 09:43 PM on 1/19/2010
- TN I'm a Fan of TN 32 fans permalink

What the.... I don't want no darn genetically modified corn. Why isn't their a bill in congress for labeling regulation on this?

This is what the people want, and the dems just aren't getting it done. (congress)

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 09:41 PM on 1/19/2010
- Whatevah I'm a Fan of Whatevah 35 fans permalink
photo

There is no such thing as corn that hasn't been genetically modified. The original maize plant is a small grass that produces a few tiny kernels. It is as different from modern varieties as a pug is different from a wolf. Genetic engineering is just a faster version of the kind of stuff breeders have done for thousands of years.

If it's food, it's genetically modified. All of it.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 07:54 AM on 1/20/2010
- cabinetmaniac I'm a Fan of cabinetmaniac 8 fans permalink
photo

True

Semantic but true

He/she means transgenic but doesn't know the term

:-]

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 09:16 AM on 1/20/2010
- pointy I'm a Fan of pointy 5 fans permalink
photo

To suggest genetic engineering is just a faster version of traditional breeding is bunk. It could be considered very close but the type of GMO's that have been brought to market so far are nothing like traditionally bred seeds. Do you not know enough basic science to understand that? Your arguments posted on this topic are only addressing a small part of the problems with GMO's . You ned to read a little more broadly on the topic.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 10:36 AM on 1/20/2010
- grn1 I'm a Fan of grn1 11 fans permalink

Go have sex with a hippo and bring your children here for the world to see.

That way you can explain how genetic engineering is an infection not breeding

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 11:10 AM on 1/20/2010
- totaldisbelief I'm a Fan of totaldisbelief 41 fans permalink

There's selective breeding and hybridization ....and then there's the introduction of pesticides and herbicides and gene splicing ...those are two different things.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 11:58 AM on 1/20/2010
- yemaya I'm a Fan of yemaya 68 fans permalink

blue corn

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 06:55 PM on 1/20/2010
- DocSkull I'm a Fan of DocSkull 33 fans permalink
photo

To suggest that splicing genes in a laboratory is the same as domestic selection within the context of a local environment is a very bad lie. It is like suggesting that administering antibiotics is the same as creating Frankenstein's monster.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 10:54 AM on 1/20/2010
- Whatevah I'm a Fan of Whatevah 35 fans permalink
photo

Of COURSE it's not the same. It's better. Gene splicing gives you far more control of the outcome.

Whether you are splicing genes or breeding selectively, it is all genetic manipulation. In scientific circles, both sides agree. It may not be the exact same, but it is very, very similar.

To say otherwise is a very big lie.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 11:25 AM on 1/20/2010
- Mum I'm a Fan of Mum 49 fans permalink

Excellent point. I especially like the "within the context of a local environment" phrase.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 05:15 AM on 1/21/2010

Organ harvesters must be busy collecting organs in Haiti to replace those here destroyed by Monsanto. The circle of life.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 08:39 PM on 1/19/2010
- MarsAmbassador I'm a Fan of MarsAmbassador 99 fans permalink
photo

The most evil company on the planet. I've been saying it for years and years.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 08:30 PM on 1/19/2010
- Whatevah I'm a Fan of Whatevah 35 fans permalink
photo

Years, huh? In all that time, have you ever considered becoming educated on the subject?

A radical idea, I know. Plus, there's a risk of becoming embarrassed when you discover the depth of your lack of knowledge.

Just for grins, why not try reading some actual information on this topic:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2010/01/15/gm-corn-organ-failure-lots-of-sensationalism-few-facts/

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 09:45 AM on 1/20/2010
- DocSkull I'm a Fan of DocSkull 33 fans permalink
photo

Yeah! read his blog which quotes Monsanto gene splicers about how safe their products are. Never mind that these same people didn't keep us safe from sacarine, DDT, Agent Orange, dioxin spills, Bovine somatotropin, dumped mercury and PCBs, lied about the safety of Roundup, and bribed government officials.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 11:00 AM on 1/20/2010
- grn1 I'm a Fan of grn1 11 fans permalink

genius enlighten us all discovermagazine how funny

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 11:11 AM on 1/20/2010
- Mum I'm a Fan of Mum 49 fans permalink

That blog article from "Discover" magazine isn't "actual information" on the topic to which MarsAmbassador was referring - Monsanto's evil.

What was that about non sequiturs?

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 05:22 AM on 1/21/2010
- rjhuntington I'm a Fan of rjhuntington 10 fans permalink
photo

Exactly what is your stake in this, Mr Shill? It's certainly not truth or consumer wellbeing. The only thing that would benefit from your views being accepted is Monsanto profits! And at great cost to human health. How much do they pay you?

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 08:40 AM on 1/21/2010
- Mum I'm a Fan of Mum 49 fans permalink

Rather than waste your time paying attention to Whatevah's personal attacks, here's some information that supports your statement about Monsanto, with which I thoroughly agree.

Watch: "Food, Inc." It's available on DVD.

Watch: "The World According to Monsanto" at this site:
http://twilightearth.com/environment-archive-2/the-world-according-to-monsanto-full-documentary/

Read: "Failure to Yield" here:
http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/science_and_impacts/science/failure-to-yield.html

Read: "Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use: The First Thirteen Years" here:
http://www.organic-center.org/science.pest.php?action=view&report_id=159

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 05:19 AM on 1/21/2010
- Bernique I'm a Fan of Bernique 52 fans permalink

Europeans have been protesting against and rejecting GMOs in their food supply for years. I'm glad that this country is being made aware of these concerns.

So where is the administration?

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 07:52 PM on 1/19/2010
- Katco I'm a Fan of Katco 6 fans permalink
photo

Corporations run America. Haven't you heard?

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 08:23 PM on 1/19/2010
- TN I'm a Fan of TN 32 fans permalink

Grow your own

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 09:42 PM on 1/19/2010
- Whatevah I'm a Fan of Whatevah 35 fans permalink
photo

If you think European politicians are saints and America politicians are devils, you need to know that the main reason some European nations ban genetically modified farming is because European ag corporations are scared of competition from the USA. All this "Frankenfood" bunk is nothing but an excuse for protectionism.

European scientists, farmers and health officials say the ban is stupid and unfair, and the European Union is pushing members to lift their bans. I predict that many of these nations will conveniently drop their bans around the time Monsanto's RoundUp Ready patents expire in 2014.

You commenters making these crazed claims about GMOs in general - and Monsanto in particular - are suckers for European corporate PR.

"There's a sucker born every minute."
J. P. Barnum

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 08:03 AM on 1/20/2010
- ReedYoung I'm a Fan of ReedYoung 194 fans permalink
photo

Show me the money.

If what you say is true, you have reached that conclusion by following a money trail. If you cannot provide proof of a money trail, then we all know you are lying.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 09:38 AM on 1/20/2010
- grn1 I'm a Fan of grn1 11 fans permalink

They are so afraid that they have not mired themselves in wars globally to promote garbage like the ideas you're hawking. Jerry Bremers order 81 of the US Coalition Provisional Authority. Google it and be glad for an occupied country that some authority is still questioned.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 11:15 AM on 1/20/2010
- rjhuntington I'm a Fan of rjhuntington 10 fans permalink
photo

Your comments are nothing more than an attempt to protect Monsanto's profits. It is impossible that human-engineered frankenfood could ever be better than or even as good as natural produce designed and nurtured by Mother Nature.

Look, we know what we want and it isn't genetically modified food, no matter what you or anyone else says about it. And that is that. Period. You will NEVER sell us on the idea that GMO's are safe or good. We won't ever believe that and won't ever accept them.

    Reply     Favorite     Flag as abusive Posted 08:38 AM on 1/21/2010
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6  Next ›  Last »  (6 pages total)

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with