GM: New study shows unborn babies could be harmed
Mortality rate for new-born rats six times higher when mother was fed on a diet of modified soya
By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor
08 January 2006
news.independent.co.uk/environment/article337253.ece
Women who eat GM foods while pregnant risk endangering their unborn babies, startling new research suggests.

The study - carried out by a leading scientist at the Russian Academy of Sciences - found that more than half of the offspring of rats fed on modified soya died in the first three weeks of life, six times as many as those born to mothers with normal diets. Six times as many were also severely underweight.

The research - which is being prepared for publication - is just one of a clutch of recent studies that are reviving fears that GM food damages human health. Italian research has found that modified soya affected the liver and pancreas of mice. Australia had to abandon a decade-long attempt to develop modified peas when an official study found they caused lung damage.

And last May this newspaper revealed a secret report by the biotech giant Monsanto, which showed that rats fed a diet rich in GM corn had smaller kidneys and higher blood cell counts, suggesting possible damage to their immune systems, than those that ate a similar conventional one.

The United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organisation held a workshop on the safety of genetically modified foods at its Rome headquarters late last year. The workshop was addressed by scientists whose research had raised concerns about health dangers. But the World Trade Organisation is expected next month to support a bid by the Bush administration to force European countries to accept GM foods.

The Russian research threatens to have an explosive effect on already hostile public opinion. Carried out by Dr Irina Ermakova at the Institute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, it is believed to be the first to look at the effects of GM food on the unborn.

The scientist added flour from a GM soya bean - produced by Monsanto to be resistant to its pesticide, Roundup - to the food of female rats, starting two weeks before they conceived, continuing through pregnancy, birth and nursing. Others were given non-GM soyaand a third group was given no soya at all.

She found that 36 per cent of the young of the rats fed the modified soya were severely underweight, compared to 6 per cent of the offspring of the other groups. More alarmingly, a staggering 55.6 per cent of those born to mothers on the GM diet perished within three weeks of birth, compared to 9 per cent of the offspring of those fed normal soya, and 6.8 per cent of the young of those given no soya at all.

"The morphology and biochemical structures of rats are very similar to those of humans, and this makes the results very disturbing" said Dr Ermakova. "They point to a risk for mothers and their babies."

Environmentalists say that - while the results are preliminary - they are potentially so serious that they must be followed up. The American Academy of Environmental Medicine has asked the US National Institute of Health to sponsor an immediate, independent follow-up.

The Monsanto soya is widely eaten by Americans. There is little of it, or any GM crop, in British foods though it is imported to feed animals farmed for meat.

Tony Coombes, director of corporate affairs for Monsanto UK, said: "The overwhelming weight of evidence from published, peer-reviewed, independently conducted scientific studies demonstrates that Roundup Ready soy can be safely consumed by rats, as well as all other animal species studied."

What the experiment found

Russian scientists added flour made from a GM soya to the diet of female rats two weeks before mating them, and continued feeding it to them during pregnancy, birth and nursing. Others were give non-GM soya or none at all. Six times as many of the offspring of those fed the modified soya were severely underweight compared to those born to the rats given normal diets. Within three weeks, 55.6 per cent of the young of the mothers given the modified soya died, against 9 per cent of the offspring of those fed the conventional soya.

whats GM & soya?

gm = genetically modified

soya = ?

The Monsanto study was bad enough. If indeed this Rusky study was done properly and is true it will blow this GM stuff back in the proponents faces.

GM=genetically modified

soya=soy beans

Genetically modified foods have the potential to do great harm.

They also have the potential to revolutionize agriculture and significantly improve human health and happiness.

Like any technology, you have to be careful with it.

I agree..... it can be good or bad.....

The Roundup ready corn (if I recall).... resistant to Roundup..... Nice thing...Just spray over the crop does no harm.  Unfortunately, the corn CAN pollinate other things, like weeds.   Bam, next you know, you may have a weed (aka undesirable plant) that is resistant to Roundup.....

Don't they mainly use the genetic modification to make the plants immune to PESTICIDES?

So they can pump the pesticide on the field at a high rate without worrying about killing the crop

That is what I have read, roundup is the pesticide in question, they charge a high price for the
roundup resistent seeds, and you are supposed to return any unused seeds to them after planting

Quoted: The study - carried out by a leading scientist at the Russian Academy of Sciences - found that more than half of the offspring of rats fed on modified soya died in the first three weeks of life, six times as many as those born to mothers with normal diets. Six times as many were also severely underweight.

That's why I don't plan having my wife give birth to any baby rats in the near future.

Quoted: Quoted: The study - carried out by a leading scientist at the Russian Academy of Sciences - found that more than half of the offspring of rats fed on modified soya died in the first three weeks of life, six times as many as those born to mothers with normal diets. Six times as many were also severely underweight. That's why I don't plan having my wife give birth to any baby rats in the near future.

"The morphology and biochemical structures of rats are very similar to those of humans, and this makes the results very disturbing" said Dr Ermakova. "They point to a risk for mothers and their babies."

$10 says this is piss-poor research, funded by one of those goofy anti-GM groups they have over in Europe.

Quoted: $10 says this is piss-poor research, funded by one of those goofy anti-GM groups they have over in Europe.

Nope, won't take that bet

I only did a quick search but the  GM companies might have intentionally provided insuffient testing to prevent such results from coming to light

There seems to be some question about THEIR research reporting

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The study - carried out by a leading scientist at the Russian Academy of Sciences - found that more than half of the offspring of rats fed on modified soya died in the first three weeks of life, six times as many as those born to mothers with normal diets. Six times as many were also severely underweight. That's why I don't plan having my wife give birth to any baby rats in the near future. "The morphology and biochemical structures of rats are very similar to those of humans, and this makes the results very disturbing" said Dr Ermakova. "They point to a risk for mothers and their babies."

Yeah, I realize rats and babies are similar....but I'm still not raising any. They tend to breed too much, and rat turds get all over the place.

BTW, I enjoy processed, modified, and wholly unnatural foods. They make up the bulk of my diet, and I attribute my superhuman strength to never eating green, tasteless shit from health food stores.

Just one more reason to convince me to buy organics

Quoted: Just one more reason to convince me to buy organics

Ok Moby....good luck with that. Remember, just because you eat organic doesn't mean your gay or effiminate.

Quoted: Quoted: Just one more reason to convince me to buy organics Ok Moby....good luck with that. Remember, just because you eat organic doesn't mean your gay or effiminate.

Thank you, I know.

On a completely unrelated note, are you and me still on for this Friday? I had a great time with you last weekend.

How can a thread about genetically modified foods get transformed into one that is dripping with gayness?



Anyways, I can's see how GM foods can affect the consumer... I mean, you don't use the corn, your body breaks it down into proteins, carbohydrates and other building blocks.  Humans don't use their food's DNA structure for anything except fuel.

Unless you're John Carpenter's "The Thing".

Quoted: On a completely unrelated note, are you and me still on for this Friday? I had a great time with you last weekend.

Nope, my starfish is still aching.

Can't party like I used to.

Quoted: How can a thread about genetically modified foods get transformed into one that is dripping with gayness? Anyways, I can's see how GM foods can affect the consumer... I mean, you don't use the corn, your body breaks it down into proteins, carbohydrates and other building blocks.  Humans don't use their food's DNA structure for anything except fuel. Unless you're John Carpenter's "The Thing".

Theres only one thing dripping around here.

But dont worry, ARDOC gave me some pills that are supposed to fix me right up

Quoted: Don't they mainly use the genetic modification to make the plants immune to PESTICIDES? So they can pump the pesticide on the field at a high rate without worrying about killing the crop That is what I have read, roundup is the pesticide in question, they charge a high price for the roundup resistent seeds, and you are supposed to return any unused seeds to them after planting

Roundup is a Herbacide Glyphosphate. It kills plants in the same manner as when you use too strong or too much fertalizer. It forces the plant to try & grow at an extreeme rate & the cells rupture & die. They have Roundup Ready corn, soy beans and peanuts to name a few. Spraying Roundup killls the weeds in the field, weeds that are poisonous and produce poisonus seeds that often can't be removed without costly processing from the harvested grain. In the past, farmers used a row cultivator behind a tractor and ran thru the fields every few weeks until harvet time. That's when diesel was 57 cents a gallon.

We have been producing GM foods for hundreds of years, everything you eat is GM, organic or otherwise. It's been called hybridization until recently. Organic simply means no man-made chemicals have been used in the raising of the crop.

FWIW, soy isn't good for you in large quantities anyway. Especially for men. It contains high levels of plant estrogens. I would never feed my infant or child %100 soy products. Some soy in foods is fine but no soy milk etc. FWIW, the GM soy beans could have higher levels of estrogens or other plant enzymes as a result of the GM which are the reason for the results of the study or it could be the soy itself.

Quoted: We have been producing GM foods for hundreds of years, everything you eat is GM, organic or otherwise. It's been called hybridization until recently. Organic simply means no man-made chemicals have been used in the raising of the crop.

I wonder how many people never caught on to this fact with all the hysteria. Seems like just about everyone.

A note to the people who get hysterical over this: It isn't necessarily genetic modification that causes the problem, just like it isn't every "rifle modification" that causes a problem. It is what you do with the modification. They must be judged individually.

So much misinformation here it's ridiculous. Corn pollinating weeds?  Round up a pesticide?

You've been hanging out with Vegans haven't you?

Quoted: Quoted: We have been producing GM foods for hundreds of years, everything you eat is GM, organic or otherwise. It's been called hybridization until recently. Organic simply means no man-made chemicals have been used in the raising of the crop. I wonder how many people never caught on to this fact with all the hysteria. Seems like just about everyone. A note to the people who get hysterical over this: It isn't necessarily genetic modification that causes the problem, just like it isn't every "rifle modification" that causes a problem. It is what you do with the modification. They must be judged individually.

In the past, they simply hand pollinated plants to get the characteristics they wanted, now we can do the same thing via gene splicing in a lab. You could loosely compare GM & hybridization to interracial marrages & children, when two people of different races produce offspring, you have a hybrid, a child with the dominate features of the adults. Kinda funny you don't hear the anti-GM people screaming about mixed marriages.

Roundup Ready seed is protected by a patent. That's one of the reasons that farmers are prevented from replanting the seed they have grown.

FWIW, hybrid seed seldom continues to produce the same plant & fruit quality characteristics in subsiquent offspring. A few generations and the plant reverts to its original state. Hybrids are actually kind of fragile.

Don't forget we have been grafting fruit trees & rose bushes for many years as well.

Quoted: We have been producing GM foods for hundreds of years, everything you eat is GM, organic or otherwise. It's been called hybridization until recently. Organic simply means no man-made chemicals have been used in the raising of the crop.

Good point there. Anyone who thinks crops, vegetables and fruits looked like they do today thousands of years ago, are kidding themselves. "Original" corn was probably small, tough to chew, tasteless and yielded very little. Same for fruits like apples or grapes. Wheat, rice, barley, or oats too were susceptible to all kinds of disease and likely produced very small quantities of grain. Most plants (and animals for that matter) that are staples of our food supply are the way they are today for one reason: selective growing (breeding) by humans. Which is nothing but poor man's genetic engineering. It's been done for many millenia long before people understood the biological processes. It's been done by cultures all over the world, the Chinese, the Incas, Aztecs, and of course Europeans. Anywhere people had agriculture they used selective growing and other techniques to multiply their harvests, to make the food taste better etc.

I vote for unrestricted genetic manipulation.

I want a monkey with five asses.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: We have been producing GM foods for hundreds of years, everything you eat is GM, organic or otherwise. It's been called hybridization until recently. Organic simply means no man-made chemicals have been used in the raising of the crop. I wonder how many people never caught on to this fact with all the hysteria. Seems like just about everyone. A note to the people who get hysterical over this: It isn't necessarily genetic modification that causes the problem, just like it isn't every "rifle modification" that causes a problem. It is what you do with the modification. They must be judged individually. In the past, they simply hand pollinated plants to get the characteristics they wanted, now we can do the same thing via gene splicing in a lab. You could loosely compare GM & hybridization to interracial marrages & children, when two people of different races produce offspring, you have a hybrid, a child with the dominate features of the adults. Kinda funny you don't hear the anti-GM people screaming about mixed marriages. Roundup Ready seed is protected by a patent. That's one of the reasons that farmers are prevented from replanting the seed they have grown. FWIW, hybrid seed seldom continues to produce the same plant & fruit quality characteristics in subsiquent offspring. A few generations and the plant reverts to its original state. Hybrids are actually kind of fragile. Don't forget we have been grafting fruit trees & rose bushes for many years as well.

In truth, we can do more with GM than we can with cross-pollination. For example, because there is no "blue" gene in roses, there are people experimenting with getting "blue" genes from other organisms to breed a blue rose. They have also produced plants that glow in the dark by taking genes from other organisms.

But, still, each must be judged on its own merits. All of what we eat today was deliberately genetically modified over the last several thousand years.

Genetically modified grains are thought to be causing things like this:

On one hand this technology is responsible for the planet's surging population, on the other, this opens a huge door for marketing new, "healthier" food product lines.

Tag.

Quoted: Genetically modified grains are thought to be causing things like this: www.northamericanwhitetail.com/naw/weirdwhitetails/ww_aa010203.jpg www.mosportsmen.com/hunting/deer/bigbk/mbeatty.jpg

And the problem is?? Those would look pretty damn cool as handle bars on a chopper don't you think?

In all seriousness, if it were found that the GM Roundup Ready soybeans had higher levels of plant estrogen or other compounds, enzymes or plant chemicals then by all means there could be a problem. Soybeans aren't exactly the ideal food, they require proper processing to be edible in the first place. Likewise, if GM carrots had excessively high levels of Vitamin A, then you'd have to be careful because VitA is toxic in higher levels. Not saying that GM foods are %100 safe, the GM breed needs to be properly tested to make sure that plant compounds are within safe consumable limits.

I'd like to see a study comparing the level of estrogens in the food supply now verses 50 years ago. If it turned out that it was markedly higher, it could explain all you metrosexuals.

As for Bucky, there are all kinds of deer feed out there specifically for increasing antler size. The mineral makeup of the soil has a direct bearing on antler size. In FL, deer have lousy racks compared to their northern & western brothers. But are soil here is very sandy with little mineral content. In fact, it's largely silica until you get towards the panhandle area. An 8 point FL buck averages #150.

Quoted: FWIW, soy isn't good for you in large quantities anyway. Especially for men. It contains high levels of plant estrogens. I would never feed my infant or child %100 soy products. Some soy in foods is fine but no soy milk etc. FWIW, the GM soy beans could have higher levels of estrogens or other plant enzymes as a result of the GM which are the reason for the results of the study or it could be the soy itself.

It sucks for me. I became allergic to soy and derivatives (soybean oil,tofu,margarine,crisco,MSG,mono & diglycerides,"natural flavors") about 3 years back, out of the blue. It gives me itchy eyes and skin. It's sort of fun to get snobby with the health food tofu lovers: "Sorry, I can't eat tofu,I'm allergic to it. Please pass the steak."
My kid isn't getting soy formula either.

So, after reading the replies it seems that I am the only one here that thinks there
is a difference between gene splicing in a lab and cross pollination\grafting

Quoted: Don't they mainly use the genetic modification to make the plants immune to PESTICIDES? So they can pump the pesticide on the field at a high rate without worrying about killing the crop That is what I have read, roundup is the pesticide in question, they charge a high price for the roundup resistent seeds, and you are supposed to return any unused seeds to them after planting

My bet is this is just what happened....they probably pumped more pesticides on the GM crops than they would otherwise be able to without hurting the crops.  This, I would wager, leads to more pesticides concentrated in the GM crop.  This less healthy food is then passed from mother to offspring.

Too little information to determine a cause from the story provided.

Quoted: Quoted: Don't they mainly use the genetic modification to make the plants immune to PESTICIDES? So they can pump the pesticide on the field at a high rate without worrying about killing the crop That is what I have read, roundup is the pesticide in question, they charge a high price for the roundup resistent seeds, and you are supposed to return any unused seeds to them after planting My bet is this is just what happened....they probably pumped more pesticides on the GM crops than they would otherwise be able to without hurting the crops.  This, I would wager, leads to more pesticides concentrated in the GM crop.  This less healthy food is then passed from mother to offspring. Too little information to determine a cause from the story provided.

I was using the incorrect word in that post, apparently it is a HERBICIDE

GM can't even make cars right.  Why the hell do they want to make food now??    

Quoted: GM can't even make cars right.  Why the hell do they want to make food now??