Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene in Commercial GMO Crops

www.independentsciencenews.org - January 24th, 2012

How should a regulatory agency announce they have discovered something potentially very important about the safety of products they have been approving for over twenty years?

In the course of analysis to identify potential allergens in GMO crops, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has belatedly discovered that the most common genetic regulatory sequence in commercial GMOs also encodes a significant fragment of a viral gene (Podevin and du Jardin 2012). This finding has serious ramifications for crop biotechnology and its regulation, but possibly even greater ones for consumers and farmers. This is because there are clear indications that this viral gene (called Gene VI) might not be safe for human consumption. It also may disturb the normal functioning of crops, including their natural pest resistance.

What Podevin and du Jardin discovered is that of the 86 different transgenic events (unique insertions of foreign DNA) commercialized to-date in the United States 54 contain portions of Gene VI within them. They include any with a widely used gene regulatory sequence called the CaMV 35S promoter (from the cauliflower mosaic virus; CaMV). Among the affected transgenic events are some of the most widely grown GMOs, including Roundup Ready soybeans (40-3-2) and MON810 maize. They include the controversial NK603 maize recently reported as causing tumors in rats (Seralini et al. 2012).

The researchers themselves concluded that the presence of segments of Gene VI “might result in unintended phenotypic changes”. They reached this conclusion because similar fragments of Gene VI have already been shown to be active on their own (e.g. De Tapia et al. 1993). In other words, the EFSA researchers were unable to rule out a hazard to public health or the environment.

Read More

Are Un-Labeled Genetically Modified Foods Already in Circulation?

www.huffingtonpost.com - January 22nd, 2013

Sixty two countries have either banned or required mandatory labels for GMO foods (as of late 2012). This includes not only all of Europe, but also China, India, Brazil, Russia, and Syria. In Europe, GMO food represents a very small proportion of the food supply, but it's not banned. 

In the USA, GMO food quietly entered the food supply in the 1990s and has been sold to unsuspecting consumers ever since, without any labeling. In that time, America has seen sharp rises in allergies, bowel-related diseases, and autism compared to countries that don't eat GMOs.There are many different GMO foods, and we have almost no scientific knowledge as to which ones are safe.

There have been very few controlled studies on the health impact of GMOs; no controlled human trials; and only one long-term animal study. Scientists are impeded from conducting tests. Researchers are legally barred from access to the GMOs, and the derivative foods are unlabeled, making controlled experiments nearly impossible. 

The only long-term study found that GMO corn caused massive tumors and premature death in rats starting after one hundred days. Critics complained about the sample size and types of rats used in this study; but those were the exact same as the FDA-approval study, which cleared the GMO corn as "safe" after monitoring impact on rats for only ninety days. I believe the science so far is inconclusive, and I'd love to see more studies.

Read More

When Is A Steak Not A Steak?

www.huffingtonpost.com - October 5th, 2012

Have you ever noticed that the USDA recommends that steaks and roasts be cooked to 145° while ground beef should be cooked to 160°? Have you ever wondered why there is a difference? After all, beef is beef -- right?

Actually there is a very good reason for the difference. While meat starts out sterile, it can become contaminated with bacteria -- like E. coli O157:H7 -- when it isn't handled properly during slaughtering or processing, and once contaminated, the only thing that will kill the bacteria is heat. With intact cuts of meat -- like steaks and roasts -- that contamination will be on the surface, not on the inside. Pathogens on the surface are much easier to kill, after all, the outside of the meat heats up much faster than the inside does, so the recommended temperature can be lower. However, with non-intact meat -- like ground beef -- surface bacteria can be moved moved or "translocated" to the inside of the meat where it is harder to kill, so a higher temperature is required. Sounds pretty straightforward, right? Intact meat gets cooked to a lower temperature of 145° and non-intact meat gets cooked to 160°.

Unfortunately, steaks and roasts are often not as they seem.

So, when is a steak not a steak and a roast not a roast? As soon as its surface has been pierced, a steak or roast becomes a non-intact cut of meat and should be cooked to a higher temperature. Many of us grew up learning to make our steaks and roasts juicer and more flavorful by piercing them with a fork and letting them sit in a marinade for a while. Now, you may not be fully aware of it, but stabbing the meat created a "hide-out" for bacteria like E. coli O157:H7. And it means that the pierced steak or roast should be cooked differently. Now, assuming that you know about the increased risk of illness, you can make an informed choice about how well you want to cook that steak or roast. But what happens when you don't know that the steak or roast you have just bought or been served was already tenderized? How do you make an informed choice then?

Read More