X*******8
发帖数: 3895 | 1 刚才看有人在“请教一个转基因问题”，故把下面一篇文章转过来，没有翻译，有兴趣
的自己看吧。
http://www.holistichealthsecrets.com/alternativehealth/genetica
modified-foods-healthy-to-eat/
Are Genetically Modified Foods Healthy to Eat?
July 14th, 2009adminLeave a commentGo to comments
The topic of Genetically Modified Food (GMOs) can be confusing. On one side
we have big Pharma
companies touting studies that show that Genetically Modified Food is
perfectly safe for consumption. On
the other hand, we have wholistic health groups and speakers saying GMOs can
present serious health
risks.
Who is right?
Here’s a reprint of a report written by Jeffrey M. Smith, author of “Seeds
of Deception” from Spilling the
Beans that helps shed light on the subject…
Doctors Warn: Avoid Genetically Modified Food
By Jeffrey M. Smith, author of “Seeds of Deception”
On May 19th, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) called on
“Physicians to educate
their patients, the medical community, and the public to avoid GM (
genetically modified) foods when
possible and provide educational materials concerning GM foods and health
risks.”[1] They called for a
moratorium on GM foods, long-term independent studies, and labeling. AAEM’s
position paper stated,
“Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM
food,” including infertility, immune
problems,[20] accelerated aging, insulin regulation, and changes in major
organs and the gastrointestinal
system. They conclude, “There is more than a casual association between GM
foods and adverse health
effects. There is causation,” as defined by recognized scientific criteria.
“The strength of association and
consistency between GM foods and disease is confirmed in several animal
studies.”
More and more doctors are already prescribing GM-free diets. Dr. Amy Dean, a
Michigan internal medicine
specialist, and board member of AAEM says, “I strongly recommend patients
eat strictly non-genetically
modified foods.” Ohio allergist Dr. John Boyles says “I used to test for
soy allergies all the time, but now
that soy is genetically engineered, it is so dangerous that I tell people
never to eat it.”
Dr. Jennifer Armstrong, President of AAEM, says, “Physicians are probably
seeing the effects in their
patients, but need to know how to ask the right questions.” World renowned
biologist Pushpa M. Bhargava
goes one step further. After reviewing more than 600 scientific journals, he
concludes that genetically
modified organisms (GMOs) are a major contributor to the sharply
deteriorating health of Americans.
Pregnant women and babies at great risk Among the population, biologist
David Schubert of the Salk
Institute warns that “children are the most likely to be adversely effected
by toxins and other dietary
problems” related to GM foods. He says without adequate studies, the
children become “the experimental
animals.”[2]
The experience of actual GM-fed experimental animals is scary. When GM soy
was fed to female rats, most
of their babies died within three weeks – compared to a 10% death rate
among the control group fed natural
soy.[3] The GM-fed babies were also smaller, and later had problems getting
pregnant.[4]
When male rats were fed GM soy, their testicles actually changed color-from
the normal pink to dark
blue.[5] Mice fed GM soy had altered young sperm.[6] Even the embryos of GM
fed parent mice had
significant changes in their DNA.[7] Mice fed GM corn in an Austrian
government study had fewer babies,
which were also smaller than normal.[8]
Reproductive problems also plague livestock. Investigations in=2 0ther state
of Haryana, India revealed that
most buffalo that ate GM cottonseed had complications such as premature
deliveries, abortions, infertility,
and prolapsed uteruses. Many calves died. In the US, about two dozen farmers
reported thousands of pigs
became sterile after consuming certain GM corn varieties. Some had false
pregnancies; others gave birth to
bags of water. Cows and bulls also became infertile when fed the same corn.[
9]
In the US population, the incidence of low birth weight babies, infertility,
and infant mortality are all
escalating.
Food designed to produce toxin
GM corn and cotton are engineered to produce their own built-in pesticide in
every cell. When bugs bite the
plant, the poison splits open their stomach and kills them. Biotech
companies claim that the pesticide,
called Bt-produced from soil bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis-has a history
of safe use, since organic farmers
and others use Bt bacteria spray for natural insect control. Genetic
engineers insert Bt genes into corn and
cotton, so the plants do the killing.
The Bt-toxin produced in GM plants, however, is thousands of times more
concentrated than natural Bt
spray, is designed to be more toxic,[10] has properties of an allergen, and
unlike the spray, cannot be
washed off the plant.
Moreover, studies confirm that even the less toxic natural bacterial spray
is harmful. When dispersed by
plane to kill gypsy moths in the Pacific Northwest, about 500 people
reported allergy or flu-like symptoms.
Some had to go to the emergency room.[11],[12]
The exact same symptoms are now being reported by farm workers throughout
India, from handling Bt
cotton.[13] In 2008, based on medical records, the Sunday India reported, “
Victims of itching have
increased massively this year . .20. related to BT cotton farming.”[14]
GMOs provoke immune reactions
AAEM states, “Multiple animal studies show significant immune dysregulation
,” including increase in
cytokines, which are “associated with asthma, allergy, and inflammation”-
all on the rise in the US .
According to GM food safety expert Dr. Arpad Pusztai, changes in the immune
status of GM animals are “a
consistent feature of all the studies.”[15] Even Monsanto’s own research
showed significant immune system
changes in rats fed Bt corn.[16] A November 2008 by the Italian government
also found that mice have an
immune reaction to Bt corn.[17]
GM soy and corn each contain two new proteins with allergenic properties,[18
] GM soy has up to seven
times more trypsin inhibitor – a known soy allergen,[19] and skin prick
tests show some people react to GM,
but not to non-GM soy.[20] Soon after GM soy was introduced to the UK, soy
allergies skyrocketed by 50%.
Perhaps the US epidemic of food allergies and asthma is a casualty of
genetic manipulation.
Animals dying in large numbers
In India, animals graze on cotton plants after harvest. But when shepherds
let sheep graze on Bt cotton
plants, thousands died. Post mortems showed severe irritation and black
patches in both intestines and
liver (as well as enlarged bile ducts). Investigators said preliminary
evidence “strongly suggests that the
sheep mortality was due to a toxin. . . . most probably Bt- toxin.”[21] In
a small follow-up feeding study by
the Deccan Development Society, all sheep fed Bt cotton plants died within
30 days; those that grazed on
natural cotton plants remained healthy.
In a small village in Andhra Pradesh, buffalo grazed on cotton plants for
eight years without incident. On
January 3rd, 2008, the buffalo grazed on Bt cotton plants for the first time
. All
13 were sick the next day; all died within 3 days.[22]
Bt corn was also implicated in the deaths of cows in Germany, and horses,
water buffaloes, and chickens in
The Philippines.[23]
In lab studies, twice the number of chickens fed Liberty Link corn died; 7
of 20 rats fed a GM tomato
developed bleeding stomachs; another 7 of 40 died within two weeks.[24]
Monsanto’s own study showed
evidence of poisoning in major organs of rats fed Bt corn, according to top
French toxicologist G. E.
Seralini.[25]
Worst finding of all – GMOs remain inside of us
The only published human feeding study revealed what may be the most
dangerous problem from GM
foods. The gene inserted into GM soy transfers into the DNA of bacteria
living inside our intestines and
continues to function.[26] This means that long after we stop eating GMOs,
we may still have potentially
harmful GM proteins produced continuously inside of us. Put more plainly,
eating a corn chip produced
from Bt corn might transform our intestinal bacteria into living pesticide
factories, possibly for the rest of
our lives.
When evidence of gene transfer is reported at medical conferences around the
US, doctors often respond by
citing the huge increase of gastrointestinal problems among their patients
over the last decade. GM foods
might be colonizing the gut flora of North Americans.
Warnings by government scientists ignored and denied
Scientists at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had warned about all
these problems even in the early
1990s. According to documents released from a lawsuit, the scientific
consensus at the agency was that GM
foods were inherently dangerous, and might create hard-to-detect allergies,
poisons, gene transfer to gut
bacteria, new diseases, and nutritional problems. They urged their superiors
to require rigorous long-term
tests.[27]
But the White House had ordered the agency to promote biotechnology and the
FDA responded by
recruiting Michael Taylor, Monsanto’s former attorney, to head up the
formation of GMO policy. That policy,
which is in effect today, denies knowledge of scientists’ concerns and
declares that no safety studies on
GMOs are required. It is up to Monsanto and the other biotech companies to
determine if their foods are
safe. Mr. Taylor later became Monsanto’s vice president.
Dangerously few studies, untraceable diseases
AAEM states, “GM foods have not been properly tested” and “pose a serious
health risk.” Not a single human
clinical trial on GMOs has been published. A 2007 review of published
scientific literature on the “potential
toxic effects/health risks of GM plants” revealed “that experimental data
are very scarce.” The author
concludes his review by asking, “Where is the scientific evidence showing
that GM plants/food are
toxicologically safe, as assumed by the biotechnology companies?”[28]
Famed Canadian geneticist David Suzuki answers, “The experiments simply
haven’t been done and we now
have become the guinea pigs.” He adds, “Anyone that says, ‘Oh, we know
that this is perfectly safe,’ I say is
either unbelievably stupid or deliberately lying.”[29]
Dr. Schubert points out, “If there are problems, we will probably never
know because the cause will not be
traceable and many diseases take a very long time to develop.” If GMOs
happen to cause immediate and
acute symptoms with a unique signature, perhaps then we might have a chance
to trace the cause.
This is precisely what happened during a US epidemic in the late 1980s. The
disease was fast acting,
deadly, and caused a unique measurable change in the blood-but it still took
more than four years to
identify that an epidemic was even occurring. By then it had killed about
100 Americans and caused
5,000-10,000 people to fall sick or become permanently disabled. It was
caused by a genetically
engineered brand of a food supplement called L-tryptophan.
If other GM foods are contributing to the rise of autism, obesity, diabetes,
asthma, cancer, heart disease,
allergies, reproductive problems, or any other common health problem now
plaguing Americans, we may
never know. In fact, since animals fed GMOs had such a wide variety of
problems, susceptible people may
react to GM food with multiple symptoms. It is therefore telling that in the
first nine years after the large
scale introduction of GM crops in 1996, the incidence of people with three
or more chronic diseases nearly
doubled, from 7% to
13%.[30]
To help identify if GMOs are causing harm, the AAEM asks their “members,
the medical community, and the
independent scientific community to gather case studies potentially related
to GM food consumption and
health effects, begin epidemiological research to investigate the role of GM
foods on human health, and
conduct safe methods of determining the effect of GM foods on human health.”
Citizens need not wait for the results before taking the doctors advice to
avoid GM foods. People can stay
away from anything with soy or corn derivatives, cottonseed and canola oil,
and sugar from GM sugar
beets-unless it says organic or “non-GMO.” There is a pocket Non-GMO
Shopping Guide, co- produced by
the Institute for Responsible Technology and the Center for Food Safety,
which is available as a download,
as well as in natural food stores an d in many doctors’ offices.
If even a small percentage of people choose non-GMO brands, the food
industry will likely respond as they
did in Europe – by removing all GM ingredients. Thus, AAEM’s non-GMO
prescription may be a watershed
for the US food supply.
International bestselling author and independent filmmaker Jeffrey M. Smith
is the Executive Director of the
Institute for Responsible Technology and the leading spokesperson on the
health dangers of GMOs. His
first book, Seeds of Deception is the world’s bestselling book on the
subject. His second, Genetic Roulette:
The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, identifies 65
risks of GMOs and
demonstrates how superficial government approvals are not competent to find
most of them. He invited the
biotech industry to respond in writing with evidence to counter each risk,
but correctly predicted that they
would refuse, since they don’t have the data to show that their products
are safe.
[1] http://www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html
[2] David Schubert, personal communication to H. Penfound, Greenpeace Canada
, October 25, 2002.
[3] Irina Ermakova, “Genetically modified soy leads to the decrease of
weight and high mortality of rat pups
of the first generation. Preliminary studies,” Ecosinform 1 (2006): 4-9.
[4] Irina Ermakova, “Experimental Evidence of GMO Hazards,” Presentation
at Scientists for a GM Free
Europe, EU Parliament, Brussels, June 12, 2007
[5] Irina Ermakova, “Experimental Evidence of GMO Hazards,” Presentation
at Scientists for a GM Free
Europe, EU Parliament Brussels, June 12, 2007
[6] L. Vecchio et al, “Ultrastructural Analysis of Testes from Mice Fed on
Genetically Modified Soybean,”
European Journal of Histochemistry 48, no. 4 (Oct-Dec 2004):449-454.
[7] Oliveri et al., “Temporary Depression of Transcription in Mouse Pre-
implantion Embryos from Mice Fed
on Genetically Modified Soybean,” 48th Symposium of the Society for
Histochemistry, Lake Maggiore ( Italy
), September 7-10, 2006.
[8] Alberta Velimirov and Claudia Binter, “Biological effects of transgenic
maize NK603xMON810 fed in long
term reproduction studies in mice,” Forschungsberichte der Sektion IV, Band
3/2008
[9] Jerry Rosman, personal communication, 2006
[10] See for example, A. Dutton, H. Klein, J. Romeis, and F. Bigler, “
Uptake of Bt-toxin by herbivores feeding
on transgenic maize and consequences for the predator Chrysoperia carnea,”
Ecological Entomology 27
(2002): 441-7; and J. Romeis, A. Dutton, and F. Bigler, “Bacillus
thuringiensis toxin (Cry1Ab) has no direct
effect on larvae of the green lacewing Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) (
Neuroptera: Chrysopidae),” Journal of
Insect Physiology 50, no. 2-3 (2004): 175-183.
[11] Washington State Department of Health, “Report of health surveillance
activitie s: Asian gypsy moth
control program,” (Olympia, WA: Washington State Dept. of Health, 1993).
[12] M. Green, et al., “Public health implications of the microbial
pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis: An
epidemiological study, Oregon, 1985-86,” Amer. J. Public Health 80, no. 7(
1990):
848-852.
[13] Ashish Gupta et. al., “Impact of Bt Cotton on Farmers’ Health (in
Barwani and Dhar District of Madhya
Pradesh),” Investigation Report, Oct-Dec 2005.
[14] Sunday India, October, 26, 2008
[15] October 24, 2005 correspondence between Arpad Pusztai and Brian John
[16] John M. Burns, “13-Week Dietary Subchronic Comparison Study with MON
863 Corn in Rats Preceded
by a 1-Week Baseline Food Consumption Determination with PMI Certified
Rodent Diet #5002,” December
17, 2002 http://www.monsanto.com/monsanto/content/sci_tech/prod_safety/fullratstudy.pdf
[17] Alberto Finamore, et al, “Intestinal and Peripheral Immune Response to
MON810 Maize Ingestion in
Weaning and Old Mice,” J. Agric. Food Chem., 2008, 56 (23), pp 11533-11539,
November 14, 2008 [18]
See L Zol la, et al, “Proteomics as a complementary tool for identifying
unintended side effects occurring in
transgenic maize seeds as a result of genetic modifications,” J Proteome
Res. 2008 May;7(5):1850-61; Hye-
Yung Yum, Soo-Young Lee, Kyung-Eun Lee, Myung-Hyun Sohn, Kyu-Earn Kim, “
Genetically Modified and
Wild Soybeans: An immunologic comparison,” Allergy and Asthma Proceedings
26, no. 3 (May-June 2005):
210-216(7); and Gendel, “The use of amino acid sequence alignments to
assess potential allergenicity of
proteins used in genetically modified foods,” Advances in Food and
Nutrition Research
42 (1998), 45-62.
[19] A. Pusztai and S. Bardocz, “GMO in animal nutrition: potential
benefits and risks,” Chapter 17, Biology
of Nutrition in Growing Animals, R. Mosenthin, J. Zentek and T. Zebrowska (
Eds.) Elsevier, October 2005
[20] Hye-Yung Yum, Soo-Young Lee, Kyung-Eun Lee, Myung-Hyun Sohn, Kyu-Earn
Kim, “Genetically
Modified and Wild Soybeans: An immunologic comparison,” Allergy and Asthma
Proceedings 26, no. 3
(May-June 2005): 210-216(7).
[21] “Mortality in Sheep Flocks after Grazing on Bt Cotton Fields-Warangal
District, Andhra Pradesh” Report
of the Preliminary Assessment, April 2006, http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp
[22] Personal communication and visit, January 2009.
[23] Jeffrey M. Smith, Genetic Roulette: The
Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, Yes! Books,
Fairfield, IA USA 2007
[24] Arpad Pusztai, “Can Science Give Us the Tools for Recognizing Possible
Health Risks for GM Food?”
Nutrition and Health
16 (2002): 73-84.
[25] Stéphane Foucart, “Controversy Surrounds a GMO,” Le Monde, 14
December 2004; referencing, John M.
Burns, “13-Week Dietary Subchronic Comparison Study with MON 863 Corn in
Rats Preceded by a 1-Week
Baseline Food Consumption Determination with PMI Certified Rodent Diet #5002
,” December 17, 2002
http://www.monsanto.com/monsanto/content/sci_tech/prod_safety/f
[26] Netherwood et al, “Assessing the survival of transgenic plant DNA in
the human gastrointestinal tract,”
Nature Biotechnology 22 (2004): 2.
[27] See memos at www.biointegrity.org
[28] José Domingo, “Toxicity Studies of Genetically Modified Plants : A
Review of the Published Literature,”
Critical reviews in food science and nutrition, 2007, vol. 47, no8, pp. 721-
733
[29] Angela Hall, “Suzuki warns against hastily accepting GMOs”, The
Leader-Post ( Canada ), 26 April 2005.
[30] Kathryn Anne Paez, et al, “Rising Out-Of-Pocket Spending For Chronic
Conditions: A Ten-Year Trend,”
Health Affairs, 28, no. 1 (2009): 15-25 |
|
