Showing posts with label genetically modified foods. Show all posts
Showing posts with label genetically modified foods. Show all posts

Friday, October 26, 2012

As California Vote Looms, Scientists Say No To Labeling Genetically Modified Foods

This election season, Californians are being served up gargantuan helpings of advertising about a proposal to require food in the Golden State to be labeled if it includes genetically modified ingredients.

On November 6, voters will decide on Proposition 37. Proponents say people simply have a right to know what's in their food. The food and biotechnology industry argues that labeling creates a false impression that there's something amiss about foods that come from engineered crops.

While lots of labels tout their lack of genetically modified ingredients, if California's Prop. 37 succeeds, foods containing GMOs would have to be labeled.

While lots of labels tout their lack of genetically modified ingredients, if California's Prop. 37 succeeds, foods containing GMOs would have to be labeled.

i
While lots of labels tout their lack of genetically modified ingredients, if California's Prop. 37 succeeds, foods containing GMOs would have to be labeled.

While lots of labels tout their lack of genetically modified ingredients, if California's Prop. 37 succeeds, foods containing GMOs would have to be labeled.

And now the world's largest general scientific society is weighing in on the debate.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science says labeling would "mislead and falsely alarm consumers." The AAAS best known for publishing Science magazine says genetically modified foods are fundamentally no different from conventionally bred foods. In fact, the organization says they are tested more extensively than most new crop varieties.

Genetically modified crops are already common. Most of the corn and soy grown in this country is engineered. Proponents say this technology can improve productivity to feed an ever-growing world. Scientists insert or manipulate a few specific genes in these foods, for example adding natural pesticides or making crops resistant to herbicides, which farmers can then spray more easily instead of mechanically tilling the soil. This no-till method decreases soil erosion but increases herbicide use.

Opponents of genetically modified foods have a variety of concerns. Some have a gut feeling that these crops are unwholesome. Others worry that the technology is driven simply by corporate profits for seed companies as well as herbicide producers. Indeed, industry has poured nearly $41 million into advertising to defeat the ballot measure, with "No on 37" TV and radio ads warning that the labels could lead to higher prices at the store, according to The Wall Street Journal. (Check out one of those ads below.)

Sometimes worries about genetically modified foods are expressed as concern over food safety, but the AAAS says that concern isn't supported by the science.

"Civilization rests on people's ability to modify plants to make them more suitable as food, feed and fiber plants and all of these modifications are genetic," the AAAS statement says.

"Modern molecular genetics and the invention of large-scale DNA sequencing methods have fueled rapid advances in our knowledge of how genes work and what they do, permitting the development of new methods that allow the very precise addition of useful traits to crops, such as the ability to resist an insect pest or a viral disease, much as immunizations protect people from disease."

But California voters aren't necessarily driven by the science of this question.

For example, many celebrity chefs, led by Alice Waters from Chez Panisse in Berkeley, have signed a petition supporting Proposition 37. Some 1,200 chefs are now voicing their support for the measure, even though restaurant food is exempt.

The petition says: "It is our duty to nourish our guests, both in body and soul. However, we can't prepare the best food we know how when information about the ingredients we purchase is hidden from us with labels that are missing basic facts. This includes foods that are genetically engineered or contain genetically modified organisms."

By framing this issue as a matter of transparency, proponents of food labeling can neatly sidestep the science of the matter.

But the issue is far from settled. According to a Los Angeles Times poll, proponents and opponents are evenly split on the issue. And 20 other states are considering similar legislation.


Monsanto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Monsanto Company (NYSE: MON) is a publicly traded American multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation. It is a leading producer of the herbicide glyphosate ... School Food, GMOs and CAFOs Safe & Healthy School Food Coalition/NYC The great PAN has released a new report with all the recent hard science on pesticides and the damage they are doing to our children. Pesticides disrupt our hormonal ... Genetic Literacy Project Crop genome plasticity and its relevance to food safety of genetically engineered breeding stacks Claire Halpin Natalie Weber Plant Physiology Redding Record Searchlight: Local Redding, California News ... Proposition 37 would require the labeling of genetically modified foods in California. Supporters say it would provide important consumer information, and opponents ... Topic Galleries -- chicagotribune.com - Chicago Tribune: Chicago ... Topic galleries provide easy access to stories and photos about people, places, organizations, events and subjects of interest to you. They bring together rich ... Take Action Genetic RouletteGenetic Roulette After watching Genetic Roulette please consider taking the following action steps below. Please also leave your comments about the movie Genetic Roulette. U.S. News National News - Latest Headlines, Videos, Photos - ABC ... ABC News reports on United States politics, crime, education, legal stories, celebrities, weather, the economy and more Food labeling: Should environmentalists be pro-GM? Genetic ... Half a century on from Rachel Carsons seminal Silent Spring, debate rages over GM food labeling proposals. Dark Politicks Latest Articles for Oct 22nd 2012Dark Politricks ... View the latest alternative news for Oct 22nd 2012 that the mainstream media doesn't want you to know about here on DarkPolitricks.com Organic Consumers Association: Millions Against Monsanto Support the California GMO Labeling Ballot Initiative California is poised to be the first state with mandatory GMO labeling laws through the 2012 California Ballot ...

As California Vote Looms, Scientists Say No To Genetically Modified Food Labels

This election season, Californians are being served up gargantuan helpings of advertising about a proposal to require food in the Golden State to be labeled if it includes genetically modified ingredients.

On November 6, voters will decide on Proposition 37. Proponents say people simply have a right to know what's in their food. The food and biotechnology industry argues that labeling creates a false impression that there's something amiss about foods that come from engineered crops.

While lots of labels tout their lack of genetically modified ingredients, if California's Prop. 37 succeeds, foods containing GMOs would have to be labeled.

While lots of labels tout their lack of genetically modified ingredients, if California's Prop. 37 succeeds, foods containing GMOs would have to be labeled.

i
While lots of labels tout their lack of genetically modified ingredients, if California's Prop. 37 succeeds, foods containing GMOs would have to be labeled.

While lots of labels tout their lack of genetically modified ingredients, if California's Prop. 37 succeeds, foods containing GMOs would have to be labeled.

And now the world's largest general scientific society is weighing in on the debate.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science says labeling would "mislead and falsely alarm consumers." The AAAS best known for publishing Science magazine says genetically modified foods are fundamentally no different from conventionally bred foods. In fact, the organization says they are tested more extensively than most new crop varieties.

Genetically modified crops are already common. Most of the corn and soy grown in this country is engineered. Proponents say this technology can improve productivity to feed an ever-growing world. Scientists insert or manipulate a few specific genes in these foods, for example adding natural pesticides or making crops resistant to herbicides, which farmers can then spray more easily instead of mechanically tilling the soil. This no-till method decreases soil erosion but increases herbicide use.

Opponents of genetically modified foods have a variety of concerns. Some have a gut feeling that these crops are unwholesome. Others worry that the technology is driven simply by corporate profits for seed companies as well as herbicide producers. Indeed, industry has poured nearly $41 million into advertising to defeat the ballot measure, with "No on 37" TV and radio ads warning that the labels could lead to higher prices at the store, according to The Wall Street Journal. (Check out one of those ads below.)

Sometimes worries about genetically modified foods are expressed as concern over food safety, but the AAAS says that concern isn't supported by the science.

"Civilization rests on people's ability to modify plants to make them more suitable as food, feed and fiber plants and all of these modifications are genetic," the AAAS statement says.

"Modern molecular genetics and the invention of large-scale DNA sequencing methods have fueled rapid advances in our knowledge of how genes work and what they do, permitting the development of new methods that allow the very precise addition of useful traits to crops, such as the ability to resist an insect pest or a viral disease, much as immunizations protect people from disease."

But California voters aren't necessarily driven by the science of this question.

For example, many celebrity chefs, led by Alice Waters from Chez Panisse in Berkeley, have signed a petition supporting Proposition 37. Some 1,200 chefs are now voicing their support for the measure, even though restaurant food is exempt.

The petition says: "It is our duty to nourish our guests, both in body and soul. However, we can't prepare the best food we know how when information about the ingredients we purchase is hidden from us with labels that are missing basic facts. This includes foods that are genetically engineered or contain genetically modified organisms."

By framing this issue as a matter of transparency, proponents of food labeling can neatly sidestep the science of the matter.

But the issue is far from settled. According to a Los Angeles Times poll, proponents and opponents are evenly split on the issue. And 20 other states are considering similar legislation.


HOME - EZ Prep Foods Survival Food for storage of up to 25+ years. We carry food and supplies for hunters and campers. Monsanto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Monsanto Company (NYSE: MON) is a publicly traded American multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation. It is a leading producer of the herbicide glyphosate ... USDA forces Whole Foods to accept Monsanto - Eating Right Whole foods has to obey USDA and let monsanto do what it wants to do. Take Action Genetic RouletteGenetic Roulette After watching Genetic Roulette please consider taking the following action steps below. Please also leave your comments about the movie Genetic Roulette. Topic Galleries -- chicagotribune.com - Chicago Tribune: Chicago ... Topic galleries provide easy access to stories and photos about people, places, organizations, events and subjects of interest to you. They bring together rich ... - The Washington Post We're unable to locate the page you requested. The page may have moved or may no longer be available. We want to help you find what you're looking for. Kelloggs GMO Flakes - Activists Take Over Kelloggs Facebook ... Is Whole Foods Sincere About Its Support for Labeling Genetically Modified Foods? Prop 37 video, featuring Danny DeVito, Bill Maher, Dave Matthews, Jillian Michaels ... Dark Politicks Latest Articles for Oct 22nd 2012Dark Politricks ... View the latest alternative news for Oct 22nd 2012 that the mainstream media doesn't want you to know about here on DarkPolitricks.com Truth Broadcast Network The Truth Shall Set You Free The Truth Shall Set You Free ... Free Speech Zone! August 19, 2012. Subvert New World Order control, publish here. Organic Consumers Association: Millions Against Monsanto Support the California GMO Labeling Ballot Initiative California is poised to be the first state with mandatory GMO labeling laws through the 2012 California Ballot ...

Thursday, September 20, 2012

As Scientists Question New Rat Study, GMO Debate Rages On

Italian farmer Giorgio Fidenato picks up what's left of his genetically altered corn after anti-GMO activists trampled it, back in 2010.

Italian farmer Giorgio Fidenato picks up what's left of his genetically altered corn after anti-GMO activists trampled it, back in 2010.

Italian farmer Giorgio Fidenato picks up what's left of his genetically altered corn after anti-GMO activists trampled it, back in 2010.

The headlines on the press releases that started showing up yesterday, here at The Salt certainly got our attention. Just one sample: "BREAKING NEWS: New Study Links Genetically Engineered Food to Tumors."

The reason for all the excitement was a study published this week in the well-respected journal Food and Chemical Toxicology. The French scientists who conducted the study basically concluded that rats fed a diet of genetically modified corn and small amounts of herbicides got sicker faster than their counterparts eating regular corn and no herbicides.

Based on the study, several anti-GMO groups are calling for a ban and the French government is calling for more investigation, but many scientists met the research with a heavy dose of skepticism.

The study describes an experiment in which scientists fed 18 different groups of rats (ten rats in each group) various concentrations of a genetically engineered kind of corn and/or small amounts of the herbicide Roundup. (Roundup is widely used in combination with genetically engineered "Roundup Ready" crops.)

Two control groups got a diet of non-modified corn and no Roundup. The experiment went on for two years, an unusually long time. Most experiments with rats that attempt to measure the toxic effects of chemicals last only 90 days.

On average, the rats that ate GM corn or drank water laced with Roundup did worse than the control group. Tumors showed up earlier (at least in some of the groups) and more rats died than in the control groups. The contrast was most stark among female rats.

So is this solid evidence that GM corn (or other crops) are bad for you? The author of the paper, Gilles-Eric Seralini, who has been campaigning against GM crops since 1997, says yes. Definitely yes.

Other scientists say, absolutely not.

Some of their complaints about the study are aimed at the study's methods. Critics point out that the type of experimental rats used in this study are particularly prone to tumors. So if you divide up 200 of them into twenty groups, as this study did, you are likely to get very high tumor rates in some of the groups. And the fact that such clusters of tumors didn't show up in the two small control groups could easily be due to random chance.

One particularly irreverent critic, Michael Grayer, a medical statistician, pointed out that the study included 18 groups of rats that were exposed to GMOs or Roundup (nine each for male and female rats), compared to only two control groups. "The potential for cherry-picking the nice positive results here from a sea of boring null ones is immense," he wrote on his blog. "Not saying they did it, of course, but it's certainly a concern."

Also, if this experiment truly showed a link between genetically engineered food and tumors, one might expect the rats that ate more of the GM corn to develop more tumors. In fact, the opposite happened. The rats eating a diet of 33 percent GMO corn stayed healthier than animals eating food with a GMO concentration of just 11 percent.

Seralini, for his part, says that this simply shows that GMOs are toxic in a different way. They merely need to rise above a certain threshold level to have harmful effects; increasing the concentration doesn't increase the harm.

Some scientists were inclined to dismiss the study simply based on Seralini's history of anti-GMO claims. "I know this guy. He has published a lot of rubbish," says Harry Kuiper, a Dutch scientist who used to be in charge of the European Commission's research program on the safety of genetically modified foods. That program sponsored many previous studies, including animal feeding studies, which came to less alarming conclusions and got much less attention than Seralini's.

In fact, Kuiper and many of his colleagues don't even think that animal feeding studies are a very good tool for studying the safety of GM foods. If there was a harmful chemical hidden in GM corn, they say, such studies wouldn't be likely to catch it, because rats can't eat enough corn for them to get a harmful dose of the toxic or cancer-causing substance.

But apart from methodological concerns and personal animosity, there's a deeper reason why scientists like Kuiper give little credence to Seralini's studies. There's a saying in science: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. For most of the scientists who have been studying the safety of GMOs, it's an extraordinary claim, at this point, to assert that the current generation of genetically modified crops are harmful to human health.

There's no apparent reason why that should be true; No one has found new toxic substances in these crops. And the giant feeding experiment that's been going on for the past fifteen years hundreds of millions of Americans consuming GMO ingredients hasn't produced evidence of harm, either.

It would take a lot more evidence that the results of this study to change their minds.


Technology - New Scientist - Science news and science jobs from ... Find news and information on the latest new technology. Read about new inventions and advances in computer software and information technology Health News & Articles Healthy Living - ABC News Get the latest health news from Dr. Richard Besser. Here you'll find stories about new medical research, the latest health care trends and health issues that affect ... Technology and Science News - ABC News - ABCNews.com - Breaking ... Get the latest science news and technology news, read tech reviews and more at ABC News. genetic engineering Facts, information, pictures Encyclopedia ... Get information, facts, and pictures about genetic engineering at Encyclopedia.com. Make research projects and school reports about genetic engineering easy with ... Knight Science Journalism Program at MIT In a story from Los Angeles, The AP reports that a 9th case of hantavirus has been linked to Yosemite National Park. It's not an epidemic yet, and no cause for alarm ... CBC Digital Archives - CBC.ca - Canadian News Sports Entertainment ... Relive Canada's history through CBC Radio and Television. This free site features thousands of radio and television clips from the archives of the Canadian ... World Environment News - Planet Ark Know your World. Choose your Impact. The World Environment News is a daily environmental update bringing you all the latest environmental stories, pictures and video ... Genetically Modified Foods: Harmful or Helpful? - CSA Recent studies about genetically-modified foods indicate that GMOs may cause harm to monarch butterfly caterpillars. Corn plants have been ... Genetically modified food controversies - Wikipedia, the free ... The genetically modified foods controversy is a dispute over the relative advantages and disadvantages of genetically modified food crops and other uses of ... Environment - Salon.com Salon coverage: Environment ... Tuesday, Sep 11, 2012 9:31 AM UTC In Portland, fluoride debate is ideological clash