Genetically Modified Maize Is Toxic — Greenpeace

gandracu writes "It appears that a variety of genetically modified maize produced by Monsanto is toxic for the liver and kidneys. What's worse, Monsanto knew about it and tried to conceal the facts in its own publications. Greenpeace fought in court to obtain the data and had it analyzed by a team of experts. MON863, the variety of GM maze in question, has been authorized for markets in the US, EU, Australia, Canada, China, Japan, Mexico, and the Philippines. Here are Greenpeace's brief on the study and their account of how the story was unearthed (both PDFs)."

Comments

Summary?

[PrinceAshitaka]

Summary?
Monsanto says "cases of liver and kedney damage not statistically significant."
greenpeace says "liver and kidney damage cases are statistically significant." Rats not fat.

No data is given.

Maybe judgement should be reserved until someone has seen this data. I believe both sides here would have no problem with manipulating data for thier own interests.

Re:Progress ?

[Ihlosi]

preferable to clearing some rain forest land.

Cleared rainforest land doesn't stay productive for very long due to the very thin layer of fertile soil underneath the rainforest. If you want to keep production up, you need to keep clearing rainforest (until you run out), and essentially leave behind an unproductive desert.

Essentially, you can play this game for maybe a handful of decades, then you're back at the starting point, minus all of the rainforest you started with. I wouldn't call that sustainable, exactly.

Re:Cant we just eat corn as it was created by natu

[plopez]

Genetic engenerring just speeds up the process a lot.
If that's the case, if it's nothing new, how can it be patented?

Re:Toxicity based on what?

[digitig]

Genetic engineering is not a panacea, but nor is it a boogieman. Genetically modified foods still contain the same amino acids in their proteins as all the other foods, so unless you modify their biochemistry to an extent where they'll produce real toxins, they will be digested just the same. The pests on pest resistant GM strains don't find that they're digested just the same. How come your argument doesn't apply to them? Oh, hold on, isn't "modify[ing] their biochemistry to an extent where they'll produce real toxins" precisely what they do in those cases?

Re:Toxicity based on what?

[baba_geek]

I agree with most of your post except the following:

 

Certainly it cannot be the modification process itself, since it uses natural enzymes.

Just because it's natural does not mean that its non-toxic. There are a lot of poisonous enzymes that occur naturally in the environment. For example, naturally occurring almonds have a poisonous enzyme. A quote from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almond):

 

The bitter almond is rather broader and shorter than the sweet almond, and contains about 50% of the fixed oil which also occurs in sweet almonds. It also contains the enzyme emulsin which, in the presence of water, acts on a soluble glucoside, amygdalin, yielding glucose, cyanide and the essential oil of bitter almonds or benzaldehyde.

Re:Greenpeace?

[hxnwix]

Yes, the messenger does matter. If this is really true, give it to a mainstream organization and let them figure it out. You must be joking. Newsertainment reporting important facts essential to the average citizen's political and economic decision making? Only a fucking idiot would entrust the ass-clowns running at least the American media with that responsibility.

Hypothetical timeline of inconvenient fact dissemination:
+0 days: greenpeace reports it
+5 days: fox news denies it
+6 days: daily show lambasts fox for denial
+10 days: CNN reports that inconvenient fact may or may not probably be verifiable, "scientists say," but "detractors detract"
+35 days: Science includes an article detailing the overwhelming, peer reviewed obvious correctness of evidence supporting the inconvenient fact
+37 days: WSJ publishes cleverly rehashed but thouroughly debunked fox news talking points; states but does not state that inconvenient fact is a convenient scam promelgated by liberals, homosexuals and communists
+38 days: my boss makes fun of me for supporting communist conspiracies & continues drinking only pure grain alcohol

Everything is toxic - Especially Greenpeace

[Nonsanity]

From agBios Database on MON 863 maize:

The Cry3Bb1 protein was found in oral gavage studies to have a No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) over 3200 mg/kg which exceeds the expected dietary exposure for humans by approximately 58000X. This level exceeded the livestock dietary exposure by 1000X.

From the Wikipedia on Water Intoxication:

Consuming as little as 1.8 litres of water (0.48 gal) in a single sitting may prove fatal for a person adhering to a low-sodium diet, or 3 litres (0.79 gallons) for a person on a normal diet.

Why is Greenpeace going after this damn corn when dihydrogen monoxide is tens of thousands of times more lethal? They really need to get their priorities straight...