Genetically Engineered Foods Archives

Animals smarter than humans? (Archive in frankenfoods.)

Comments?
Misty L. Trepke
http://www.searching-alternatives.com

Things That Make You Go Hmm...
Well Being Journal
News and Views

From the Current Issue: Vol. 12, No. 5 ~ September/October 2003

---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
ANIMALS REJECT GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS

Bill Lashmett watched as two or three cows were let into a feeding
area.... The first trough they came to contained fifty pounds of
shelled Bt (genetically modified) corn. The cows sniffed it,
withdrew, and walked over to the next trough, which contained fifty
pounds of natural shelled corn. The cows finished it off. The next
group of cows did the same thing. Lashmett said the same experiment
was conducted on about six or seven farms in Northwest Iowa in 1998
and again in 1999. Identical trials with hogs yielded the same
results, also for two years in a row. Lashmett, who has a background
in biochemistry and agriculture, says that animals have a natural
sense to eat what is good for them and avoid what isn't.

The Washington Post reported that mice, usually happy to munch on
tomatoes, turned their noses up at the genetically modified
FlavrSavr tomato that scientists were so anxious to test on them.
Scientist Roger Salquist said of his tomato, "I gotta tell you, you
can be Chef Boyardee and mice are still not going to like them." The
mice were eventually force fed the tomato through gastric tubes and
stomach washes. Several developed stomach lesions; seven of forty
died within two weeks. The tomato was approved [for human
consumption] without further tests.

According to BBC News, April 27, 2002: "Safety tests on genetically
modified maize currently growing in Britain were flawed, it has
emerged. The crop, T-25 GM maize [corn], was tested in laboratory
experiments on chickens. During the tests, twice as many chickens
died when fed on T-25 GM maize, compared with those fed on
conventional maize. This research was apparently overlooked when the
crop was given marketing approval [for humans] in 1996." (From Seeds
of Deception, by Jeffrey M. Smith. See companion feature articles,
this issue, pages 32 and 35, for a revealing look at the faulty
science the GMO industry has used to force GM foods onto the
American food marketplace.)

v

BENEFICIAL MOTIVE FOR SUPPLEMENT REGULATION?

Right now a war is being fought over the regulation of supplements,
with the various battles at different stages in countries across the
globe. The European Union already passed its Food Supplements
Directive in July of 2002, framing it on the principle that
supplements should be proven safe and effective in the same manner
as pharmaceuticals. The UK did not immediately implement this
directive, but will do so come the end of this month. Australia,
Canada, New Zealand and a host of other nations are involved in
their own battles, and here in the U.S., Senator Dick Durbin's
proposed "Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2003" is one of the first
shots in what will undoubtedly become a mounting campaign.

I'm sure you wish you could trust the big businesses and governments
to fairly and honestly test vitamins and herbals so we could make
more informed and confident decisions in this respect. But then you
learn things like this: a major study undertaken to discredit the
herbal St. John's wort in 2001 received "unrestricted funding" from
the pharmaceutical company Pfizer. St. John's wort, an anti-
depressant, has sales of over $400 million per year, cutting a niche
into the profit of Pfizer's prescription anti-depressant Zoloft, and
Pfizer doesn't like to lose profit. It's not the first or last time
a supplement was discredited in an "independent" study that received
major pharmaceutical company dollars.

Excerpts from an article by Brian Vaszily, chief editor and weekly
columnist of Mercola.com. Full article:
www.mercola.com/2003/jul/19/supplement_regulation.htm.

v

PHARMACEUTICAL CRIMES?

On June 14, 2003 before an international audience in The Hague,
Mathias Rath, M.D., laid a complaint of genocide and other crimes
against humanity against the financial interests behind the
pharmaceutical industry. Full stories at www4.dr-rath-
foundation.org.

v

YOUR CAR COSTS MUCH MORE BECAUSE OF DRUG COMPANIES' GREED

GM is taking on billions of dollars in debt despite recent price
discounts and no-interest financing offers. The reason? Mounting
pension and health care costs for its retired workers.

The company's pension [plan] is $19 billion underfunded, and the gap
is threatening to widen as drug prices and health care costs grow
ever higher. While the pension costs are forcing GM-and by default,
other U.S. automakers-to slash prices, ultimately vehicle prices
will rise to help automakers improve profits and stay competitive.-
The Washington Post, June 24, 2003.

Dr. Mercola's Comment:

The huge profits sought by drug companies have profound impacts on
the economy, as evidenced by their impact on something seemingly
unrelated-car prices.

Drug companies are the most powerful industry in the United States.
Their grasp is far-reaching and it seems that very few aspects of
the U.S. economy are unaffected. They also have a major influence on
the majority of studies published and nearly all of medical
education. This influence is what causes physicians to use their
expensive symptomatic Band-Aids as solutions for people's problems.

A large part of the reason why the drug companies have been able to
get away with their outrageous prices is that the vast majority of
people do not pay for their medications directly anymore. Insurance
companies are picking up the tab....

Intuitively nearly everyone realizes that using a drug is rarely
solving the foundational cause of the problem....

The system is desperately broken and in need of a change. We cannot
spend over $1 trillion for health care just to improve profits for
drug companies. We have the capital to more than adequately treat
nearly all people. It is just a matter of shifting our priorities
and perspectives.

If you want to further understand how corporations-and government-
manipulate science and the media by preying upon the public trust-
and you want to know how to protect yourself-I highly recommend the
book Trust Us, We're Experts. It is truly one of those books that
all Americans should read, and would make an important gift for any
young adult who wants to maintain control over him or herself [while
entering] "the real world."
www.mercola.com/2003/july/9/car_costs.htm.

v

WEBSITE TURNS TABLES ON GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS

Annoyed by the prospect of a massive new federal surveillance system
("TIA"), two researchers at MIT are launching "GIA"-a new Internet
service that will let citizens create dossiers on government
officials. "It's sort of a citizen's intelligence agency," said
Chris Csikszentmihalyi, assistant professor at the MIT Media Lab.
Here's the link for the Government Information Awareness (GIA)
project: http://opengov.media.mit.edu. Full story at:
http://business.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2003/07/04/website
_turns_tables_on_government_ officials.

v

WHEAT PRODUCTION LINKED TO BIRTH DEFECTS

Babies born in wheat-producing counties were found to be twice as
likely to have birth defects. The story appeared in the July issue
of Environmental Health Perspectives, a journal of the National
Institutes of Health. The study was conducted by Dina
Schreinemachers, Ph.D., an Environmental Protection Agency
researcher in North Carolina. She studied over 43,000 births and
divided the counties by rates of wheat production based on U.S.D.A.
data. She relied on birth defect rates reported by the National
Center for Health Statistics. Schreinemachers noted that rural,
agricultural counties with high wheat production where farmers use
chlorophenoxy herbicides evidenced significantly higher rates of
certain birth defects. Web site for Environmental Health
Perspectives is http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/.

v

AS YOU SOW AND REAP

When Monsanto Corporation accused Saskatchewan farmer Percy
Schmeiser of stealing its patented genetically modified (GM) canola
seed, writes Erica Sagrans (Utne Reader, p. 33, Jan/Feb 2003), it
ignited a legal battle that has serious implications for the rights
of farmers around the world.

The genetically modified seeds, which Schmeiser claimed drifted into
his fields from neighboring farms, destroyed the 70-year-old
farmer's life-long work developing a variety of canola seeds ideally
adapted to local conditions. Worse, the corporation sued him for
using its patented seed without paying for it.

When brought to court, the judge sided with the biotechnology giant,
ruling that the way the seed got to Schmeiser's land was irrelevant.
Schmeiser appealed, mortgaging his home to pay legal bills. Last
September he lost that appeal, but Canada's Supreme Court has now
agreed to hear the case.

"Unfortunately, Schmeiser's ordeal is not an isolated case," reports
Carmelo Ruiz-Marrero in CorpWatch (Oct. 21, 2002), a San Francisco-
based online publication covering issues in corporate
accountability. Agribusiness corporations now use new satellite
imaging technologies to find crops containing patented GM seed, and
then sue the farmers who didn't purchase it. Monsanto is currently
suing other farmers in Canada and the U.S. For his resistance to
Monsanto's legal attacks, Schmeiser was one of nine environmental
pioneers honored with a Bioneers Award at the organization's annual
conference in October.

Updates and for donations to the case, see www.percyschmeiser.com.

Re: Animals smarter than humans? (Archive in frankenfoods.)

Re: Animals smarter than humans? (Archive in frankenfoods.)

Re: Animals smarter than humans? (Archive in frankenfoods.)