GMO Fluorescent Lamb Accidentally
Eaten
July 07, 2015
Story at-a-glance
-
Researchers created a sheep that had been genetically
modified with the green florescent protein gene of a
jellyfish
-
A ewe of the GM sheep, which was supposed to be used for
research purposes only, was mixed with non-GM sheep and sent
off to a slaughterhouse, where it most likely ended up in
the food supply for human consumption
-
It’s thought one of the researchers intentionally did away
with the GM lamb as a “malicious act” after an internal
dispute
By Dr. Mercola
Across the US and much of the world, farmers are planting
Monsanto’s genetically modified (GM) “Bt corn,” which is equipped
with a gene from the soil bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis
(Bt).
It produces Bt toxin—a pesticide that breaks open the stomach of
certain insects and kills them. In addition to Bt corn, Monsanto
also created Roundup Ready corn and soy, which are engineered to
withstand contamination with otherwise lethal doses of
Monsanto's herbicide Roundup.
Yet, genetic modification isn’t only being used to create plants
with built-in pesticides and herbicide tolerance. Plants and animals
alike are also being genetically engineered to express
pharmaceutical products and various other traits.
‘Pharming’ Turns Plants and Animals into Drugs
“Pharming,” or modifying plants and animals with pharmaceuticals
began around the year 2000 and has steadily increased since.
Like all genetic modification, this is a highly experimental process
that could have disastrous outcomes if the end products become
intermingled with the natural environment. As reported by Nutrition
Prescription:1
“In animal pharming the host animals’ DNA is genetically
engineered to express a pharmaceutical in the animals milk...
hopefully.
For example, a cow or goat can be genetically engineered to give
milk that will provide medication. Specific examples include
vaccinations, blood clotting medications, and medications that
fight eye and lung infections.
It’s a risky prospect for the animal because the genetic
engineering disrupts normal gene function and DNA processes. Of
course there are animal rights issues here, however the major
concern is that food systems could become contaminated with
pharmaceutical products.
…Pharming projects are also being conducted with plants,
using corn and potatoes bioengineered with, for example, cystic
fibrosis and antibacterial medications. The biotech companies
are in France and Germany, but they work with farms in the US…
Major concerns with bio-pharming are, again, that food or
feed crops may become contaminated with the pharmaceutical
products, and also that the products may have negative effects
on natural ecosystems.”
Vaccines in Your Milk?
In 2009, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the
first drug produced by livestock that had been bioengineered to
express a human gene. In that case, the protein was extracted from
the milk of GM goats.
In 2012, researchers introduced DNA coding for the malaria
parasite into the goat genome linked to milk production. The DNA was
supposed to "switch on" only in the mammary gland when the goat
produces milk.
The experiment was geared toward producing a malaria vaccine for
third-world countries, with the ultimate goal being that eventually
children will be able to become vaccinated simply by drinking the
milk.
As we've seen in the past with genetically modified plants,
genetically engineered vaccine-producing animals might enter the
food supply unexpectedly -- exposing unintended recipients to the
vaccine.
Or the animals might escape and breed with others, passing these
bioengineered genes on with unpredictable consequences. Even the
technology itself is risky at best, because when animals are exposed
to foreign DNA, literally anything can happen…
Lamb with Jellyfish Gene Enters the Food Supply, Probably Eaten
A perfect example of the seriously lacking safety
surrounding GMOs occurred in France late last year. Researchers were
working with a sheep, Emeraude, that had been genetically modified
with the green florescent protein gene of a jellyfish.
The gene reportedly helped the researchers study the sheep heart
while looking for ways to restore heart function after heart
attacks.
A ewe of the GM sheep, Rubis, which would therefore also carry
the jellyfish gene, was then mixed with non-GM sheep and sent off to
a slaughterhouse, where it most likely ended up in the food supply
for human consumption. This is thought to have occurred in October
2014 in the Paris region.2
Adding another layer to the story, it doesn’t look like this was
a mistake. Rather, it’s thought one of the researchers intentionally
did away with the GM lamb as a “malicious act” after an internal
dispute. According to the Washington Post:3
“…allegedly, the modified lamb was purposefully mixed in
with non-modified sheep and sent off to a slaughterhouse… INRA
[the National Institute for Agronomic Research] representatives
blame the tension between researchers at the facility for the
act, and have suspended one individual pending an
investigation.”
INRA was quick to say there was no risk to public health from the
experimental meat, but no safety studies were given to back up this
assessment. The sheep were being produced for research purposes
only, so it’s likely no safety assessments on consuming the
animals were conducted. It’s also illegal to sell GM food in France.
GM Corn Modified with Hepatitis B Vaccine Grown with Little
Oversight
Clearly the supposed safeguards in place to keep experimental GM
crops and animals separate from the food supply are not working. In
many cases, many experimental GM crops are not getting the
oversight necessary to prevent environmental or public-health
catastrophes.
GM “pharmaceutical” corn that is being used in an experimental
trial for hepatitis B vaccine is being grown in an environmentally
sensitive area along California’s central coast, just 100 feet from
a critical habitat for threatened wildlife species.
According to data obtained by Hearst Newspapers under Freedom of
Information laws, already two ‘incidents’ have been reported. SF
Gate reported:4
“At a secret location among the vineyards of California's
Central Coast, a plot of genetically engineered corn is
producing proteins for industrial and pharmaceutical uses,
including an experimental vaccine for hepatitis B.
The altered corn is growing with federal approval 100
feet from a steelhead stream in San Luis Obispo County, in
designated critical habitat for the threatened California
red-legged frog.
Agriculture Department inspectors have reported two
‘incidents’ at the site, including conventional corn sprouting
in a 50-foot fallow zone, but the findings did not rise to the
level of a fine or even to a formal notice of noncompliance for
the company that planted it, Applied Biotechnology Institute
Inc.”
The founder and president of Applied Biotechnology, John Howard,
had previously founded another biotech company that has been banned
from GMO trials because of contaminations in the Midwest that
required a half-million bushels of soybeans and 150 acres of corn to
be destroyed.5
GMO Trials Often End up Contaminating Nearby Land, But US Government
Allows Them Anyway
The USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS),
which is tasked with overseeing GMO trials, typically takes a
decidedly “industry-friendly” approach. In one unusual case, APHIS
gave Gebbers Farms of Washington an approximately $20,000 fine for
growing GM apples less than 100 feet from conventional apple trees.
The farm had already been previously cited for the same, along
with failure to keep proper records and keep animals away from the
test plot.6
This fine was a rarity, and according to investigations by Hearst,
one of just two civil penalties issued since 2010, despite
nearly 200 notices of non-compliance.
Issues uncovered by Hearst include paperwork violations, lost
seeds, and GM plants growing where they’re not allowed. Monsanto
alone, which conducted about one-quarter of the field trials in the
US, has received 35 notices of non-compliance from 2010 to 2013.
They received one civil penalty in 2010 after experimental GM
cotton was ginned, making its way into cottonseed meal and hulls
that were consumed by livestock. Inspection reports revealed many
problems with GM trials that show the challenges, and the
impossibility, of keeping GM crops restrained to a designated area:7
- Heavy rains washed out test plots, increasing risks of GMO
dispersal
- Wild pigs and cows have eaten GM crops, including GM
sugarcane and GM corn, in once case after a gate was
accidentally left open
- Government researchers planted GM barley in the wrong county
and also moved GM soybeans across state lines without
authorization
- An automobile plowed through a test plot of corn and was
abandoned about a mile away (with GM corn found in the ditch)
The Risks of GM Crops Are Already Known…
While the risks of consuming foods that contain pharmaceutical
drugs or genes from creatures typically not eaten have yet
to be fully disclosed, there's very convincing evidence that GM
foods, including those already on the market in the US, spell
nothing but trouble for your health. In one
review of GMOs -- an analysis of 19 animal studies -- it was
revealed that nearly 10 percent of blood, urine, organ, and other
parameters tested were significantly influenced by GMOs, with the
liver and kidneys faring the worst.
In a human feeding study on GM foods, seven volunteers ate
Roundup-ready soybeans. These are soybeans that have
herbicide-resistant genes inserted into them in order to survive
being sprayed with otherwise deadly doses of Roundup herbicide. In
three of the seven volunteers, the gene inserted into the soy
transferred into the DNA of their intestinal bacteria and continued
to function long after they stopped eating the GM soy. In addition,
Jeffrey Smith, founder of the Institute for Responsible Technology,
has documented at least 65 serious health risks from GM products of
all kinds. Among them:
- Offspring of rats fed GM soy showed a five-fold increase in
mortality, lower birth weights, and the inability to reproduce
- Male mice fed GM soy had damaged young sperm cells
- The embryo offspring of GM soy-fed mice had altered DNA
functioning
- Several US farmers reported sterility or fertility problems
among pigs and cows fed on GM corn varieties
- Investigators in India have documented fertility problems,
abortions, premature births, and other serious health issues,
including deaths, among buffaloes fed GM cottonseed products
Nutritional differences are also apparent. A 2012
nutritional analysis of GM versus non-GM corn showed shocking
differences in nutritional content. Non-GM corn contained 437 times
more calcium, 56 times more magnesium, and 7 times more manganese
than GM corn. GM corn was also found to contain 13 ppm of glyphosate
(the active ingredient in Roundup), compared to zero in non-GM corn.
The EPA “safe” level for carcinogenic glyphosate in American water
supplies is 0.7 ppm, and organ damage in animals has occurred at
levels as low as 0.1 ppm
From a regulatory perspective, GM crops are considered
“substantially equivalent” to their non-GM counterparts. This means,
in essence, that they are essentially the same, with no meaningful
differences for your health or the environment. Yet, the problem,
and it’s a major one, is that research has shown GM crops are
not substantially equivalent to their conventionally grown
counterparts, and they’re already being unleashed into the
environment.
The FDA has (so far) not required labeling of GM foods
because they are deemed to be “substantially equivalent” to non-GM
foods. It is also due to substantial equivalence that no oversight
or long-term safety testing has been required of GM crops.
Help Support GMO Labeling
The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA)—Monsanto’s Evil
Twin—is pulling out all the stops to keep you in the dark about
what’s in your food. For nearly two decades, Monsanto and corporate
agribusiness have exercised near-dictatorial control over American
agriculture. For example, Monsanto has made many claims that
glyphosate in Roundup is harmless to animals and humans. However,
recently the World Health Organization (WHO) had their research team
test glyphosate and had labeled it a probable carcinogen.
Public opinion around the biotech industry's contamination of our
food supply and destruction of our environment has reached the
tipping point. We're fighting back. That's why I was the first to
push for GMO labeling. I donated a significant sum to the first
ballot initiative in California in 2012, which inspired others to
donate to the campaign as well. We technically "lost” the vote, but
we are winning the war, as these labeling initiatives have raised a
considerable amount of public awareness.
The insanity has gone far enough, which is why I encourage you to
boycott every single product owned by members of the GMA, including
natural and organic brands. More than 80 percent of our support
comes from individual consumers like you, who understand that real
change comes from the grassroots.
Recently, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan) has reintroduced a bill (HR
1599) that would preempt states' rights to enact GMO labeling laws.
This bill would create a federal government program to oversee
guidelines for voluntary labeling of products that do not contain
GMOs. It would specifically prohibit Congress or individual states
from requiring mandatory labeling of
GMO foods or ingredients. It would also allow food manufacturers
to use the word "natural" on products that contain GMOs.
The Pompeo bill, ironically named "The Safe and Accurate Food
Labeling Act," is proposing nothing if not inaccurate
labeling of foods, by preventing you from ever learning which foods
may contain GMOs. Critics of the bill have dubbed it the DARK Act,
aka "Deny Americans the Right-to-Know" Act, which is exactly what
the bill does.
Stopping the passing of the Pompeo bill is THE most important action
anyone concerned about GMOs can possibly take right now, and the
outcome will quite possibly determine the future of agriculture.
It's the choice of a regenerative or degenerative food system; a
choice of monoculture or diversity, of obesity or wellness,
pollution, or nutrition.
TAKE ACTION NOW! Your local representatives need to hear from
you! Please contact them today by
CLICKING HERE.
Thankfully, we have organizations like the Organic Consumers
Association (OCA) to fight back against these junk food
manufacturers, pesticide producers, and corporate giants.
Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More
Non-GMO Food Resources by Country
Together, Let's Help OCA Get the Funding They Deserve
Let’s Help OCA get the funding it deserves. I have found very few
organizations who are as effective and efficient as OCA. It’s a
public interest organization dedicated to promoting health justice
and sustainability. A central focus of the OCA is building a
healthy, equitable, and sustainable system of food production and
consumption. Please make a donation to help OCA fight for GMO
labeling.

© Copyright 1997-2015 Dr. Joseph Mercola. All Rights Reserved.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2015/07/07/gmo-fluorescent-lamb.aspx
|