Slashdot Mirror
Organ Damage In Rats From Monsanto GMO Corn
jenningsthecat writes "A study published in December 2009 in the International Journal of Biological Sciences found that three varieties of Monsanto genetically-modified corn caused damage to the liver, kidneys, and other organs of rats. One of the corn varieties was designed to tolerate broad-spectrum herbicides, (so-called 'Roundup-ready' corn), while the other two contain bacteria-derived proteins that have insecticide properties. The study made use of Monsanto's own raw data. Quoting from the study's 'Conclusions' section: 'Our analysis highlights that the kidneys and liver as particularly important on which to focus such research as there was a clear negative impact on the function of these organs in rats consuming GM maize varieties for just 90 days.' Given the very high prevalence of corn in processed foods, this could be a real ticking time bomb. And with food manufacturers not being required by law to declare GMO content, I think I'll do my best to avoid corn altogether. Pass the puffed rice and pour me a glass of fizzy water!"
People would stop eating corn products.
Those who were damaged by the defective product would seek damages in a civil court.
If the courts declined to provide relief then the injured parties would all get together, storm the Monsanto headquarters and lynch all the executives.
It doesn't look like the 'impact factor' relates to anything. Its in the header whether you're looking at an article or their contact information. No explanation there.
This note on the front page: This Journal is ranked among the top 2.1% of journals (29/1380) according to SCImago in the area of Agricultural and Biological Sciences ...details
Indexed/covered by MEDLINE, PubMed, Science Citation Index (SCI) Expanded, Current Contents®/Life Sciences, EMBASE, CAS, CABI, Scopus
Plus there isn't much anti-GM crapvertising elsewhere on the website. I'm normally among the first to call bs, but this could very well be the ideal journal for the paper as it seems specifically dedicated to issues in the biological/agricultural sciences.
Anyone familiar with the journal or practices in submitting in the field?
Unfortunately, your scotch and bourbon is likely fortified with a corn product.
Bourbon is primarily made from maize corn, while scotch is primarily barley. This is why it is important to ensure that your scotch is pure single malt!
The Long Now Foundation
It sounds to me like the issue isn't the GM itself, but the over-use of novel pesticides that it permits.
No, you're misunderstanding. They don't allow the use of pesticides, the pesticides have been inserted into their genome. The pesticides are derived from bacterial DNA that is naturally herbicidal. Unfortunately, it's also a rodenticide, which means it's probably pretty poisonous to us as well..
And the distinction is unnecessary if you just make sure the food is safe for long term use.
No. It won't matter. There are safe GM foods that have been feeding people for hundreds of years, but it only takes one to go wrong that will cause even the safe GM foods to banned. There was a case where an African country turned down free GM food and allowed their people to starve because some hippie-eco-group convinced the government that GM food was poison.
Also, note that the "pesticide" in question is Bt toxin. Bt stands for bacillus thuringiensis. Bt is used in mosquito dunks, pesticide sprays and several other applications. It is not just considered safe for humans, animals and beneficial insects, but is even considered to be ORGANIC! You can spray your crops all day and night with millions of gallons of Bt and not lose your organic certification.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
Nice Link, which explained that they turned down the Free GM food because they would lose 50% of the market they export to by having GM food (European Union) and feared the so called "terminator" seeds that give no seeds for replanting.
I'm not a GM food reactionary, I just think that as a policy, the only thing we can do to fix these sort of safety problems is regulate the safety of GM foods, regardless of what genes are modified.
Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
Meta studies are scientific, though, depending on the circumstances, they may not be as good evidence as a primary study.
Studies where you reanalyze someone else's data are quite common, and are the reason there have been efforts to create large, generally available datasets including cancer registries, pharmaceutical trials and astronomical surveys.
There are safe GM foods that have been feeding people for hundreds of years
Genetic engineering is in its infancy. Genetic engineering is NOT the same as crossbreeding or selective breeding; with genetic engineering you directly insert parts of one DNA strand into another. They've only been able to do this for a decade or two.
You can't make one strain of corn toxic by breeding it with another strain of corn. You can make a strain of corn toxic by inserting DNA from a toxic species that corn couldn't mate with. They've inserted human DNA into pigs; that's genetic engineering. You couldn't mate with a pig, though. If you could it would be crossbreeding. Again, nothing similar at all.
Free Martian Whores!
Also, note that the "pesticide" in question is Bt toxin. Bt stands for bacillus thuringiensis. Bt is used in mosquito dunks, pesticide sprays and several other applications. It is not just considered safe for humans, animals and beneficial insects, but is even considered to be ORGANIC! You can spray your crops all day and night with millions of gallons of Bt and not lose your organic certification.
I disagree with you. When Bt is sprayed it breaks down and that is why there is a 2 weeks 'cool down' period before it is allowed for human consumption. In this case Bt is delivered to your system as is therefore it is not the same as spraying your crops with it.
I'm Not Antisocial, I'm Just Not User Friendly
Somehow the Bt toxin makes its way through the bug's digestive system to kill it. Why is it so unbelievable that some of the toxin makes it through a human's digestive system?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacillus_thuringiensis
"When insects ingest toxin crystals the alkaline pH of their digestive tract causes the toxin to become activated."
Most (all?) higher animals use a strongly ACIDIC digestive tract. Not a serious concern.
No idea why it would directly affect rodents. Maybe it doesn't directly affect them at all.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
This distinction will be lost on millions of reactionaries.
Maybe, but it's not lost on me or the people in my social circle who protested the so-called Frankenfoods.
Basically, it's not GM manipulation of a crop that I have a problem with. It's Monsanto.
In 1997, it was alleged a local FOX affiliate cooperated with Monsanto in suppressing an investigative report on the health risks associated with Monsanto's bovine growth hormone product, Posilac. Posilac, a synthetic hormone used to increase milk production in cows, while banned in many first-world countries, is used in the United States.
Steve Wilson and Jane Akre disagreed with the inclusion of material in the story they felt was slanted or misleading. Both reporters were eventually fired for not being pro-Monsanto in their reporting. Wilson and Akre sued. The court held that Fox News had no obligation to report truthfully, and the First Amendment protects their right to lie. Therefore, the court held that firing a reporter for refusing to lie is not actionable under the whistleblower statute. The story can be seen in the feature length documentary film The Corporation.
You show me a corporation that makes GM foods, ethically, and I'll support them to hell and back. But Monsanto? Not a chance.
No, it's not. With selective breeding you can never go outside of the scope of the accumulation of genetical variety available in the species your breeding with. You cannot breed dogs that produce poisonous bites by just interbreeding different type of dogs, the genetical material needed to be able to allow for a poisonous bite just isn't there. Theoretically dogs could in the long run, through spontaneous genetical mutation acquire such features, but that's outside the scope of breeding of dogs.
If you would start genetically modifying dogs with genetical material alien to dogs, say poisonous snakes, you actually could produce such poisonous dogs, given enough perseverence and research. Genetically modifying creatures is in essence engineering, working from the specfications of features of the creature up to a design. Selective Breeding is bricolage, using whatever is at hand to meet a goal that's changing along with the process.
Well, off the top of my head, there's the Credit CARD Act of 2009:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_CARD_Act_of_2009
And the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilly_Ledbetter_Fair_Pay_Act
And a big act for managing public lands:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnibus_Public_Land_Management_Act
Plus a bunch of other legislation that didn't make it past the filibuster, a rather high bar that has now become de rigeur. And a lot of regulatory redesign that doesn't require the Congress, like the EPA deciding to regulate CO2 as a pollutant.
So yeah, I'd say there is a difference in the two parties. Maybe not as big as you'd like, but if you don't see any difference, you're not looking.
Hmm did you hear the rest of the story on that one ?
They refused "free" gm crops seed and food, worked hand in hand with ONU to alleviate the food crisis and started sowing "normal" traditionnal seeds that were acclimated to their country.
And now they have almost reached food production independence.
Can you remind me what happened to the neighboring countries that accepted ?
They actually sowed some of the grains and now pay the "Monsanto Tax"...and even if short term they solved the problem, they now are in a problematic situation for years (possibly decades) to come.
Have a look at a documentary called "the world according to Monsanto" and what happened to some south american countries that are now paying millions, if not billions to Monsanto each year. Also have a look at Indian (like in India) cotton farmers and their suicide rates since they switched to GM cotton. One of the worst human tragedy of the decade, because they had to buy fertiliser and RoundUp, got more heavilly in debt and commited suicide when they couldn't repay it all.
And I'm not even a green activist. I just despise the bastards from Monsanto...
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker