Subject: (Butler) Eating Better... Genetically (fwd)
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 080305 -0600 (CST)
From: "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To: emfguru <rbeavers@llion.org>
--------------------------------------------------
.......The "reward" for discovering something that "establishment
science" does not WANT to believe ... is always accompanied by
ridicule, suffering and isolation..... Still, it is enough of a
reward...... To be able to: "... speak your latent conviction, that it
may become the universal law." (Emerson)........
Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
rbeavers@llion.org................
...It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness...
.................PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFITS...............
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 14:55:20 -0800
From: James Butler
To: "Roy L. Beavers"
Subject: Eating Better... Genetically
Genetically Manipulated food, brought to you by the good folks at
Monsanto, makers of the neurotoxin, Aspartame.
Of course in Canada, we have let a flood of genetically altered food
into the market. Health Canada stating, € The moral and ethical
questions are outside the regulatory framework €.
Good answer.See, just ignore the Health part completely.
______________________________________________________________________
UK Mail On Sunday 31 Jan 1999
Scientist in Frankenstein food alert is proved right
Accusations of cover-up after top pathologist backs the
professor whose tests brought him humiliation
By Christopher Leake and Lorraine Fraser
The professor who was publically humiliated over claims that genetically
modified Frankenstein food may be harmful has been proved right after
all.
World expert Dr Arpad Pusztai was stripped of his post and described as
muddled by his superiors after he referred to experiments in which rats
had been damaged when fed genetically-altered potatoes.
But today The Mail on Sunday can reveal that rats did suffer shocking
internal damage. And we can disclose that a leading pathologist who has
re-examined their remains has confirmed Dr Pusztais findings.
The scientific bombshell is sure to rekindle controversy over the safety
of genetically altered food.
The revelations will also place a question mark over the future of Dr.
Putzais former boss, Professor Philip James, who ousted him from the
research programme and is now being tipped as head of the Governments
new Food Standards Agency; due to be formed in April next year
Dr Pusztai, 68, lost his job at the Government-funded Rowett Research
Institute in Aberdeen after he told TVs World In Action of his studies.
The interview last August sparked a fierce debate on the potential
dangers of genetically engineered food.
Yet Dr Pusztai was discredited for getting his facts badly confused by
apparently referring to the wrong experiment. Professor James issued
statements to the Press saying Dr Pusztai would have to retire because
he had got it wrong by suggesting the rats in question had been fed
potatoes modified with genes from a bean when, in fact, these
particular experiments had never been carried out.
The apparent mix-up - made amid the glare of TV publicity - cost Dr
Pusztai his reputation.
But we can reveal that Dr Pusztai had conducted other crucial
experiments using potatoes altered by another gene - and these tests
demonstrated a worst case scenario.
The tests were made on rats that were fed potato altered to carry a gene
from snowdrops. This enabled the vegetable to make a chemical known as
GNA lectin, which would protect it from insect and worm damage. The
effect was devastating.
Dr Pusztais results - contained in a report to Professor James and the
Scottish Office - detail liver damage, even in rats fed cooked
genetically modified potatoes for ten days.
His findings-seen by The Mail on Sunday - reveal that in most animals,
highly significant changes occurred in the weights of some or most of
the rats vital organs and that immune system organs, like the spleen
and thymus, were frequently affected.
Dr. Putzai's revelations have been backed by an independent analysis by
consultant pathologist Dr Stanley Ewen, of Aberdeen University, who
examined the preserved rats organs.
Neither he nor Dr Pusztai will discuss their findings, which are
expected to be published But a leading expert said: Dr. Ewens results
will cause an explosion. These were measurable changes in the rats fed
modified potato - and we feel theres been a cover-up. There should be
more openness in the whole business about public money and how it being
used in this field.
The doctors conclusions are a setback for the multibillion pound
biotechnology industry, which is seeking licenses worldwide to grow high
volume crops that resist herbicides.
At the start of the experiment, it was thought that snowdrop lectin was
unlikely to produce harmful effects, so it would have been considered
for commercial development.
But now the revelations have thrown GM foods research into disarray.
After Dr Pusztais TV outburst Professor James - the man behind
Government proposals for a Food Standards Agency - ordered an audit of
Dr Pusztai a work by four scientists.
It concluded that existing data did not support the idea that the
modified potatoes had any effect on growth organ development or immune
function in the rats.
But the question being asked last night was why the report from the four
scientists auditing the work do not analyse data on the rats internal
organs which might have established if they had been damaged.
GM foods are already on supermarket shelves. An estimated 60 percent of
processed foods on sale in the UK contain genetically modified soya
grown in the US.
Big business is pushing for licences to produce the crops in the UK, but
at present only Government-approved test sites growing altered produce
are permitted. And none of the crops is allowed to be sold to the
public. A fortnight ago, the House of Lords Select Committee on European
Communities - to which Professor James gave evidence - acknowledged
there were potential risks to the environment but said GM crops
had much to offer.
The committee said the regulatory regime in place to ensure the safety
of products sold in the shops was thorough and proper.
In oral eveidence to the same committee last October, Professor James
alluded to new data from Dr Pusztai - but he did not reveal its
contents. Professor James said last night: I am desperate that dear old
Arpad Pusztai maintains his scientific credibility. I was interested in
the GNA (snowdrop) data and told everybody - with the agreement of
Pusztai, Scottish Office, Ministries, you name it - that
this was important stuff and under no circumstances must we just have
snippets coming out.
He confirmed that the four scientists he had asked to audit Dr Pusztais
claims did not have the full details of all the tests available to them.
They considered the data available only up to the date of the World In
Action programme.
Professor James said he hadnt disclosed Dr Pusztais new data to the
Lords committee in October because I am desperate to protect him. There
is a standard policy in the scientific world that when there is
something particularly of public interest and you have got something
that could be of enormous significance, you must make sure your data is
not only sound and robust but withstands review by your
scientific peers.
He said that if Dr Pusztais analysis was correct and the
full feeding studies were repeated and produced the same
findings, it would be very important.
Paul Tyler, the Liberal Democrats food spokesman, said the
new evidence raised a query over Professor Jamess role as
possible boss of the food agency. The EU is more likely to
be an effective watchdog on this issue than anybody in
Britain, because successive governments have rolled over and
had their tummies tickled by some of the huge multi-national
companies involved in the research. Ive seen no evidence
yet that there is anybody in Whitehall to question in an
effective way this sort of development.
Every time we get information about genetically modified
organisms we see more evidence for a complete moratorium on
further development of the programme until a lot more
research has been done by a totally independent
organisation.
A Greenpeace spokesman said As more research is done well
keep finding big problems. We dont need to produce food
this way ... so why are we taking these risks?
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html