Roundup Tolerant GM Maize Linked To Tumor Development

New submitter spirito writes with this snippet about rats fed Roundup laced water: "The first animal feeding trial studying the lifetime effects of exposure to Roundup tolerant GM maize, and Roundup, the world's best-selling weedkiller, shows that levels currently considered safe can cause tumors and multiple organ damage and lead to premature death in laboratory rats, according to research published online today by the scientific journal Food and Chemical Toxicology. ... Three groups were given Roundup in their drinking water, at three different levels consistent with exposure through the food chain from crops sprayed with the weedkiller: the mid level corresponded to the maximum level permitted in the US in some GM feed; the lowest corresponded to contamination found in some tap waters. Three groups were fed diets which contained different proportions of NK603 – 11%, 22% and 33%. Three groups were given both Roundup and NK603 at the same three dosages. The final control group was fed an equivalent diet with no Roundup or NK603 but containing 33% of equivalent non-GM maize." The Chicago Tribune reports that not everyone's convinced of the results: "Experts not involved in the study were highly skeptical about its methods and findings, with some accusing the French scientists of going on a 'statistical fishing trip.'"

Comments

Awful headline.

[Anonymous Coward]

The headline suggests that GM corn causes cancer. This is ludicrous and only feeds the ignorant paranoid anti-GM crowd.

It's ROUNDUP exposure that's linked to tumors - NOT genetic modifications. I am not at all surprised.

I've been saying for years that there is nothing particularly risky about GM foods - it's dumping horrendous of herbicide on things that's risky... this is obvious to me, but not to the ignorant masses.

Don't give the freaks ammunition, please.

Re:Awful headline.

[binarylarry]

In other news, Monsanto has patented cancer.

Joe Baggaleducia, Monsanto Chairperson, said "Monsanto is tired of users benefiting from the use of our proprietary cancer implementation and we're going to be pressing the matter in the courts soon. We don't care if you're old, young, or dying. You will be paying your $599 Monsanto CancerPlus fee, you cock smoking tea baggers. Show me the money!"

Mr Baggaleducia then stripped naked and jumped into the giant money pit he recently had installed inside his tropical home in the Caymens. A Monsanto Spokesman was not available for comment.

Re:Awful headline.

[o'reor]

Wrong. TFA says:

Researchers found that NK603 and Roundup both caused similar damage to the rats' health whether they were consumed on their own or together.

(emphasis mine)

So even without spraying Roundup on it, the GM crop increases the occurences of cancers.

Re:Awful headline.

[dbet]

The paper

They don't go into detail about how the Roundup is exposed. In previous studies, they use adjuvants to help with delivery, which can increase toxicity. But they say nothing in this paper. They also don't control dietary intake. What if GM corn is tastier and they're eating more? Or less?

Furthermore, they observe the same health effects in the roundup group, the GM corn group, and the GM+R (both) group, AND these effects are not dose-dependent. Combine this with the small sample size, and the fact they're using a tumor-prone rat breed, you have a paper that's going to be crucified by peer review.

As of today, there is no citation for this paper by Food and Chemical Toxicity which means... I don't know. But it hasn't been published yet. Was this leaked during peer review process? This stinks and everyone should withhold judgement.

Re:How to Attribute a Newspaper

[Anonymous Coward]

Poor editing for comedy is really the only reason I keep coming back. Try not to spoil that.

Re:Did they study the health effects of starving?

[crazyjj]

Actually the economically advantaged are the ones buying the organic everything.

FTFY.

Dangerous poison.

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Analyze a dangerous poison.
2. Modify a crop's genes to be resistant against said dangerous poison
3. Treat modified crop liberally with dangerous poison
4. Have cattle eat crop treated with dangerous poison
???
6. Be amazed at what the poison does to non-resistant life forms.

Re:Dangerous poison.

[fustakrakich]

They should modify the peoples' genes, so they can eat the Roundup directly without having to bother with that silly ol' corn.

Re:Dangerous poison.

[vlm]

1. Analyze a dangerous poison.

LOL. Glyphosate kills anything that makes its own tyrosine, tryptophan and phenylalanine. People supposedly cannot synthesize it we can only eat it. Much as oxygen will kill some anaerobic bacteria, it would be a huge shock to discover oxygen causes cancer in people.

A quick "chemists glance" at the MSDS and its about as scary as rubbing alcohol... I would not drink it or wash my hands in it before eating, but I wouldn't freak out either. Everything in a chemistry lab is dangerous, you have to put it in a spectrum, and this is worse than the distilled water but pretty much obviously on the safe edge of the spectrum compared to everything else in a lab. Some of the problem is the solvents and stuff the herbicide is dissolved into to spread it around. I heard there was a court case where some PR clown called it as safe as table salt, which although technically true is misleading because your body has perfectly adequate although extremely unpleasant ways to remove a lethal salt dose from your body, unless you somehow stop it or inject it all at once. Calling it as safe as rubbing alcohol would have been about as true and less likely to get sued.

Its pretty laughable that glyphosate is a "dangerous poison". Try some organic mercury compounds if you want real danger. Its not even useful for biowarfare, not persistent enough, its highly biodegradable. Which mystifies me... so if it all degrades worst case in 100 days, and twinkie sits on the shelf for 4 months before its eaten, how is anyone eating the stuff? Yeah, I know, field to table salad without rinsing or washing, but that doesn't fit the meme of all american diets being hyper processed.

The other funny part is its use will be a footnote in history "soon". Too many resistant weeds are spreading. Why spend big bucks to apply something that'll do nothing. Why agitprop to ban something that no one will want to manufacture pretty soon, anyway?

Re:Dangerous poison.

[o'reor]

Actually, glyphosate is dangerous for plants only. However, the molecule has to find its way across the cell walls of the plant. So Monsanto added surfactant agents to break into the cells, so that the glyphosate could enter the plant. And those are *really* dangerous.

The end is near! (Really)

[judoguy]

I have a friend that's a food researcher at a large Midwestern university. He's not opposed to Roundup per se, but rather the *massive* use of it on vast areas of monoculture.

He says that this is guaranteed to produce Roundup impervious weeds. At some point these super weeds will need very toxic chemicals to kill. The real problem is that vast areas of monoculture are unsustainable.

Nature abhors a vacuum and will fill it up with what can tolerate the environment.

Giant Ragweed

[sir_eccles]

You know what has also become Roundup resistant? Giant ragweed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19585341

Re:How to Attribute a Newspaper

[zero.kalvin]

I am more concerned about the original paper ( which is no where to be found ) then proper newsfeed and what not.

Re:Did they study the health effects of starving?

[gardenermike]

Way, way off. The numbers are more like a 30% decrease in yields, based on current farming methods. Considering that we haven't applied science to organic farming like we have to chemical farming, due to easy postwar chemical availability, the gap could probably be closed even more. Yes, conventional farms have marginally higher productivity. But you are off by an order of magnitude with your "5x" claim.