By Dr. Mercola
Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research
Organization (CSIRO) has developed a type of genetically
modified (GM) wheat that may silence human genes, leading to
disastrous health consequences.
Last year, University of Canterbury Professor Jack Heinemann
released results from genetic research he conducted on the
wheat, which showed with “no doubt” that molecules created in
the wheat, which are intended to silence wheat genes to change
its carbohydrate content, may match human genes and potentially
silence them.
University Professor Judy Carman agreed with Heinemann's
analysis, stating in Digital Journal:1
"If this silences the same gene in us that it
silences in the wheat -- well, children who are born with
this enzyme not working tend to die by the age of about
five.”
Over 770 Pages of Potential Genetic Matches
Heinemann reported that his research revealed over 770 pages
of potential matches between two GM genes in the wheat and the
human genome. Over a dozen matches were “extensive and identical
and sufficient to cause silencing in experimental systems,” he
said.
Experts warned that eating the wheat could lead to
significant changes in the way glucose and carbohydrates are
stored in the human body, which could be potentially deadly for
children and lead to serious illness in adults.
Since this adverse effect is extremely plausible, long-term
studies are needed before the wheat is released into the
environment and the human food chain – but a new review states
that the risks are still not being adequately assessed.
A New 'Breed' of GM Crops
RNA is one of three major macromolecules, like DNA.
Double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) is responsible for regulating well
over one-third of human genes.
In a new risk assessment, Heinemann and colleagues explained
that while all commercial GM plants are currently created
through in vitro DNA modification typically to create a new
protein, a “growing minority” are designed to change their RNA
content in order to regulate gene expression.2
The technique, known as RNA interference or RNA knockdown,
essentially turns off or “knocks down” certain genes. It was
first used commercially in 1994 for the development of the
Flavor Savr tomato, which was later withdrawn from the market,
and has been applied in various GM crops since. As reported in
The Atlantic:3
"Researchers have been using this phenomena to their
advantage in the form of small, engineered RNA strands that
are virtually identical to miRNA. In a technique called RNA
interference, or RNA knockdown, these small bits of RNA are
used to turn off, or 'knock down,' certain genes.
RNA knockdown was first used commercially in 1994 to
create the Flavor Savr, a tomato with increased shelf life.
In 2007, several research teams began reporting success at
engineering plant RNA to kill insect predators, by knocking
down certain genes. As reported in MIT's Technology Review
on November 5, 2007, researchers in China used RNA knockdown
to make:
'...cotton plants that silence a gene that allows
cotton bollworms to process the toxin gossypol, which occurs
naturally in cotton. Bollworms that eat the genetically
engineered cotton can't make their toxin-processing
proteins, and they die.'
And: 'Researchers at Monsanto and Devgen, a Belgian
company, made corn plants that silence a gene essential for
energy production in corn rootworms; ingestion wipes out the
worms within 12 days.' Humans and insects have a lot in
common, genetically. If miRNA can in fact survive the gut
then it's entirely possible that miRNA intended to influence
insect gene regulation could also affect humans."
The Risks of GM Crops Containing dsRNA
According to Heinemann’s analysis, dsRNA-mediated silencing
is becoming the basis of novel traits in GM plants, including
biopesticides and altered nutritional characteristics. “Changing
the nature, kind and quantity of particular regulatory-RNA
molecules through genetic engineering can create biosafety
risks,” the review reported,4
noting that, “we find evidence that the risks are not considered
by some regulators.” They continue:
“While some GMOs have been designed to make new dsRNA
molecules, in other GMOs such molecules may occur as a
side-effect of the genetic engineering process. Still others
may make naturally-occurring dsRNA molecules in higher or
lower quantities than before.
Some dsRNA molecules can have profound physiological
effects on the organism that makes them. Physiological
effects are the intended outcomes of exposure to dsRNA
incorporated into food sources for invertebrates;
biopesticides and other topically applied products, and
could be the cause of off-target effects and adverse effects
in non-target organisms.
A daunting outcome is raised, that each [dsRNA]
formulation might have its own risks.…Production of intended
dsRNA molecules may also have off-target effects due to
silencing genes other than those intended. Unanticipated
off-target adverse effects can be difficult to detect and
they are not possible to reliably predict using
bioinformatics techniques. Regulatory bodies are not
adequately assessing the risks of dsRNA-producing GM
products. As a result, we recommend a process to properly
assess the safety of dsRNA-producing GM organisms before
they are released or commercialized.”
Risks of RNAs of Plant Origin Already Uncovered
One type of dsRNA is microRNA (miRNA). MicroRNA are basically
small pieces of RNA that interact with your genes, essentially
stopping certain genes from being expressed. MiRNA exists in
human body fluid naturally; however, microRNA also exists in
plants, and research has shown that eating the wrong plants
may transfer this plant miRNA to humans -- with potentially
devastating implications.
The study, published in 2011, determined that microRNA from
cooked plant foods like rice, wheat and potatoes can in fact
collect in your blood and tissue, leading to a number of
potential health problems.5
The study further revealed that microRNA remains completely
stable after not only cooking, but through the digestion process
as well. Most importantly, the researchers found a significant
quantity of microRNA in the human body, concluding that:
"… plant miRNAs are primarily acquired
orally, through food intake."
MicroRNA has been widely shown to alter many critical
biological processes, including apoptosis – the process of
programmed cell death and DNA fragmentation. As a result, the
dysregulation of microRNAs has been linked to cancer and
various other diseases. And, as noted, plant miRNA has
been shown to interfere with human microRNA by
mimicking it and binding to the receptors, and also potentially
through alterations in gene expression.
Most Consumers Unaware of GMO Risks
The biotech industry, led by Monsanto, is increasing their
propaganda efforts to reshape their public image, and sway your
opinion against the need to label GM foods. As The Atlantic
reported:6
“Given its opposition to the labeling of GM foods… it
seems clear that Monsanto wants you to close your eyes, open
your mouth, and swallow."
Indeed, many consumers are still in the dark about the very
real risks that GM crops pose. The Canadian news station CBC
News recently reported that despite warnings that GM foods could
destroy the environment and pose risks to agricultural
diversity, most Canadians have “no strong views on the matter.”
Andreas Boecker, an associate professor at the University of
Guelph who has researched consumer acceptance of GM foods, told
CBC News:7
"These concerns among farmers and informed groups of
consumers does not translate to the average consumer. They
are too far removed from the concerns of the farming
community… And if you go by shopping behavior most foods
that they buy have some share of GMOs."
This is precisely what the biotech industry wants, even as
increasing research demonstrates GM crop dangers. One recent
study found that rats fed a type of genetically engineered corn
that is prevalent in the US food supply for two years
developed massive mammary tumors, kidney and liver damage,
and other serious health problems. This was at dietary amounts
of about 10 percent. Does 10 percent or more of your diet
consist of GM ingredients?
At present, you can't know for sure, since GM foods are not
labeled in the US. But chances are, if you eat processed foods,
your diet is chock full of GM ingredients you didn't even know
about – causing equally unknown consequences to your health.
Keep Fighting for Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods
While California Prop. 37 failed to pass last November, by a
very narrow margin, the fight for GMO labeling is far from over.
The field-of-play has now moved to the state of Washington,
where the people's initiative 522, "The People's Right to Know
Genetically Engineered Food Act," will require food sold in
retail outlets to be labeled if it contains genetically
engineered ingredients. As stated on LabelitWA.org:
"Calorie and nutritional information were not always
required on food labels. But since 1990 it has been required
and most consumers use this information every day.
Country-of-origin labeling wasn't required until 2002. The
trans fat content of foods didn't have to be labeled until
2006. Now, all of these labeling requirements are accepted
as important for consumers. The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) also says we must know with labeling if our orange
juice is from fresh oranges or frozen concentrate.
Doesn't it make sense that genetically engineered
foods containing experimental viral, bacterial, insect,
plant or animal genes should be labeled, too? Genetically
engineered foods do not have to be tested for safety before
entering the market. No long-term human feeding studies have
been done. The research we have is raising serious questions
about the impact to human health and the environment.
I-522 provides the transparency people deserve. I-522
will not raise costs to consumers or food producers. It
simply would add more information to food labels, which
manufacturers change routinely anyway, all the time. I-522
does not impose any significant cost on our state. It does
not require the state to conduct label surveillance, or to
initiate or pursue enforcement. The state may choose to do
so, as a policy choice, but I-522 was written to avoid
raising costs to the state or consumers."
Remember, as with CA Prop. 37, they need support of people
like YOU to succeed. Prop. 37 failed with a very narrow margin
simply because we didn't have the funds to counter the massive
ad campaigns created by the No on 37 camp, led by Monsanto and
other major food companies. Let's not allow Monsanto and its
allies to confuse and mislead the people of Washington and
Vermont as they did in California. So please, I urge you to get
involved and help in any way you can, regardless of what state
you live in.
- No matter where you live in the United States, please
donate money to these labeling efforts through the
Organic
Consumers Fund.
- If you live in Washington State, please
sign
the I-522 petition. You can also
volunteer
to help gather signatures across the state.
- For timely updates on issues relating to these and other
labeling initiatives, please join the Organic Consumers
Association on
Facebook, or follow them on
Twitter.
- Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to
actively support the Washington initiative.
© Copyright 1997-2013 Dr. Joseph Mercola. All Rights Reserved.