The Mystery in your milk - very long

[Guest guest]

The Report that Monsanto and Fox TV didn't want you tosee! JoAnn Guest Jan 20, 2003 09:11 PST Laura Lee News - The Mystery in Your Milk-http://www.lauralee.com/news/mysterymilk.htm -The Mystery in Your Milkby Jane Akre & Steve WilsonThe report that Monsanto and Fox TV didn't want you tosee. Published for the first time.Jane Akre and Steve Wilson, a respected reporting teamat WTTV, a Fox Network Station in Tampa, Florida, were fired fromtheir jobs after refusing to broadcast what they knew and documented tobe false and distorted information about Monsanto's bovine growthhormone (BGH) -- a genetically engineered product that has been linked tothe proliferation of breast, prostate, and colon cancer cells in humans.On August 28, 2000, a Florida jury unanimously decided that Akre had been fired for threatening to blow the whistle on Fox for pressuring her and Wilson to broadcast a false, distorted and slanted news report and awarded her $425,000 for lost wages and damages. Fox is appealing.This is the first time that the script that got the reporters in trouble has appeared in print. This important document has been edited for length but not censored.

For the full version, go to the website:http://www.foxbghsuit.comReporters' Version - Part I"Nature's most nearly perfect food" - that's how mostof us have always thought of milk AS wholesome, nutritious and purejust like it says on some ofthe trucks that deliver it. But down on thefarm where most of us never see?Some Florida farmers have been quietly squeezing morecash from their cowsby injecting them with an artificial growthhormone so they'll produce more milk than nature intended.Thurman Hattan, Florida Dairy Farmer: "Yes I wouldsay, people in Floridaare using it. (Reporter Jane Akre) And youyourself?

(Hatten) Ahh.Narration: Hatten is one of many Florida dairymenreluctant to admit that they're injecting their cows every two weeks.Hattan continues: ".it's possible I could be using it."Narration: The drug some Florida farmers don't wantyou to know they're using is a Monsanto laboratory version ofbovine growth hormone known as BGH.Here's how it works: when the cow gets injected with extra BGH, it stimulates the production of another hormone called IGF-1.That's really thestuff that speeds up the cow'smetabolism, causing her to produce up to 30 percent more milk.But some scientists like Dr. Samuel Epstein are warning what might be goodfor the farmers' bottom line might be big trouble down the line for people drinking the milk from treated cows.Samuel Epstein, Scientist, University of Illinois:".there are highly suggestive if not persuasive lines of evidence showingthat consumption of this milk poses risks of breast and colon cancer."Narration: Dr. Epstein is a scientist at the University of Illinois Schoolof Public Health. He's earned three medicaldegrees, written eight books,and is frequently called upon to advise Congressabout things in our environment which may cause cancer. He and otherslike Dr. William von Meyer point to what they say is a growing body of scientificevidence of a link between IGF-1 and human cancers which might not showup for years to come.William Von Meyer, Research Scientist: "We're going tosave some lives if wereview this now. If we allow BGH to go on,I'm sure we're taking excessive risks with society."Narration: Dr. Von Meyer has spent 30 years studying chemical products and testing their effects on humans. He'ssupervised many such tests on thousands of animals at schools such as the University of London and UCLA. He's headed agricultural, chemical and genetic research at some of America's most prestigious companies.Monsanto is the giant chemical company which sells the synthetic hormone under the brand name PosilacS and Monsanto has consistently rejected the concerns of scientists around the world.Dr. Robert Collier, Chief Monsanto BGH Scientist: "In fact, the FDA hascommented several times on this issue after therewere concerns raised. They have publicly restated human safetyconfidence.this is not something knowledgeable people have concerns about."Narration: While other companies have dropped by thewayside, Monsanto has invested a mountain of money into BovineGrowth Hormone.Company sales tapes encourage farmers to use it as a tool to milk moreprofits out of every cow. Video Clip of Monsanto sales tape: "Of course you'llwant to inject Posilac into every eligible cow, as each cow not treated is a lost income opportunity."Narration: A number of critics, including at least one state agriculture ommissioner, have called it "crack for cows" for the way it speeds up the cow's milk production.but despite its promise of profit, some dairymen saythe product doesn't always lead to happy trails for the cows or for thosewho tend them.Charles Knight, Florida Dairy Farmer: "It's a tool that can be used, but you better be careful, 'cause it can burn you..."Narration: Near Wachula, Charles Knight won't use Monsanto's synthetic BGH anymore. He is one of many farmers who say they've watched Posilac burntheir cows out sooner, shortening their lives by maybe two years.Narration: Knight says he had to replace 75 percent of his herd due to hoof problems and serious udder infections. Those are twoof more than 20 potential troubles listed right on the product warninglabel. But apart frompotential suffering for the animals, the major concern is how the hormone injected into the cow changes the milk that ends up onour tables.

Robert Collier: ".this is the most studied molecule certainly in the historyof domestic animal science."Narration: While that claim may be open to dispute,Monsanto.did put the product through a decade's worth of testing before it was approved by the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine as an animal drug. But that's part of the problem, according to many scientists who say since BGH alters the milk we drink, it should meet the higher safety standardsrequired of human drugs. The critics say tests on BGH milk that couldhave answered these concerns about long-term risk to humans were justnever done.Dr. William Von Meyer, Research Scientist: "A human drug requires two years of carcinogenic testing and extensive birth-defect testing.BGH was testedf or 90 days on 30 rats at any dose before it was approved."Robert Collier: "But suffice it to say the cancer experts don't see thehealth issue and it's unfortunate the public is being scared by an issue that shouldn't be of concern."Part IINarration: You won't find Ol' Flossie and Bossie on Fred Gore's dairy farmin Zephyr hills. On Fred's farm, all the cows have numbers instead of names -and they're watched by electronic eyes 24 hours a day.Farmer Gore, Florida Dairy Farmer: "They help tell me if proper procedures are being followed."

Narration: At a modern dairy farm, cows wear transponders that even tell a computer how much milk she gave today.

Farmer Gore: "She's giving 121 pounds a day."Narration: In the competitive business of dairy farming these days, productivity is paramount. That's why Fred Gore and others like him were all ears when the giant Monsanto chemical company started promoting its new product called Posilac.Video Clip from Monsanto sales tape: "Posilac is the single most-tested product in history and it helps increase your profit potential."Narration: Monsanto promised that Posilac - a laboratory version of the cow's natural growth hormone - could get Ol' 2356 and her friends to produce up to 30 percent more milk. That was good news to Florida farmers who needall the help they can get in a state where high heat, humidity and little local grain make dairy farming a struggle.The "promise of Posilac" sounded great to dairyman Charles Knight.but he says it didn't turn out that way. Charles Knight, Florida Dairy Farmer: "About the sametime we began having alot of foot problems with our cows because they got so crippled they couldn't walk."Narration: Right after he started using the drug on his herd near Wachulathree years ago, Knight says his animals were plagued with those problems and serious infections of his cows' udders. Troubles he attributes to Posilac eventually caused him to replace the majority of his herd. He sayswhen he called dairy experts at the University of Florida and at Monsanto,they both had the same response.Farmer Knight: "[T]hey said you're the only person having this problem so it must be what you're doing here. You must be having management problems."Narration: The University of Florida, by the way, did much of the research on BGH and has received millions in gifts and grants from Monsanto. Knightsays neither the university nor the company ever mentioned Monsanto research that showed hundreds of other cows on other farms were also suffering hoof problems and mastitis, a painful infection of the cow's udders.Farmer Knight: If untreated, the infection can get into the cow's milk so farmers try to cure it by giving the cow shots of antibiotics.more drugs that can find their way into the milk on your table,which could make your own body more resistant to antibiotics.Dr. Michael Hanson, Consumers Union Scientist: "In fact, there is over 60 drugs that they believe can be used on farms and they test for a very small percentage of them.File video of protesters chanting: "Boycott BGH.Boycott BGHS"

Collier: "There are no human or animal safety issues that would prevent approval in Canada once they've completed their review, not that I'm aware of."Narration: But long-term human safety is exactly the concern expressed by a Canadian House committee on health. Here are the minutes of a 1995 meetingwhere members voted to ask Canada's Health Minister to try and keep BGH offthe market for at least two more years.Why? ".to allow members of Parliament to further examine the human health implications" of the drug.It's still not legal to sell the unlicensed product north of the border,despite the company's efforts to gain the approval of government regulators.Narration: In the Fall of 1994, Canadian television quoted a Canadian health official as reporting Monsanto offered $1-2 million if her government committee would recommend BGH approval in Canada without further data or studies of the drug. Another member of her committee who was present when Monsanto made the offer was asked: "Was that a bribe?"

File Video Clip of CBC documentary - CBC Correspondent to committee member:"Is that how it struck you? (Dr. Edwards) Certainly!"Reporter Jane Akre on camera: "Monsanto said the report alleging bribery was"a blatant untruth," that Canadian regulators just didn't understand the offer of the money was for research. Monsanto demanded a retraction. The Canadian Broadcasting Company stands by its story..."Hansen: "Monsanto has a very checkered history with some of its other products."Narration: Dr. Michael Hansen of Consumers Union is another American scientist still very skeptical about BGH. He says Monsanto was wrong years ago when it convinced the government PCB's were safe.Those were put inside electrical conductors for years.until researchers inJapan and Sweden showedserious hazards to human health and theenvironment.And you've heard of Agent Orange, 2-4-5-T, the defoliant used in Vietnam?Monsanto convinced the government it, too, was safe. It was later proven to be extremely harmful to humans.and a government investigator found what she said was "a clear pattern of fraudulent content in Monsanto's research"which led to approval.In the case of BGH, Monsanto was required to promptly report all complaints from farmers. Florida dairyman Charles Knight says he was complaining loud and clear that Posilac was decimating his herd.but four months later he found the company had not passed one of his complaints to the FDA as required.Charles Knight, Florida Dairyman: ".so how many more hundreds of complaints out there sat and were not registered with FDA?"Narration: Monsanto admits a long delay in reporting Knight's complaints. A company spokesman claims despite a series of on-farm visits and phone conversations with Knight, it took four months for them to understand he wascomplaining about BGH. As for those safety claims for previous Monsanto products that turned out to be dangerous, the company offered no comment.Part IIINarration: Whether you know it or not, by the time it's bottled, chances are milk from treated cows ends up in the jug you carry home. It's made the milk on your table one of the first genetically engineered foods ever to be fed to your family. and the population at large.Jeff LeMaster, Consumer/Dad: "And for her, now that she's eating people food,we want to give her as much good stuff without the chemical additives as possible."Narration: Grocers and the dairy industry know synthetic BGH in milk worries consumers like Jeff and Janet LeMaster. A whopping 74 percent of those questioned in this University of Wisconsin study released just last year expressed concern about unknown harmful human health effects which might show up later.Robert Collier, Chief Monsanto BGH Scientist: "What they need to know is that the milk hasn't changed...."

Narration: That's the assurance of Monsanto. It's the company position, despite scientific studies which show the milk we're getting from BGH-treated cows has ahigher level of something called IGF-1, a hormone believed to promote cancer.Narration: Government regulators in Canada, New Zealand and all of Europe have expressed similar concerns and refused to license the drug for sale in all those countries.

File Video, consumer protesters chanting: "Boycott BGH!"Narration: So three years ago when the drug was approved in America and protesters started dumping milk that contained the synthetic hormone, yourgrocer and your milkman decided something had to be done to protect sales.Riley Hogan, Tampa Dairy Co-op: "For good business reasons, Publix [amarketing chain] and I both wanted to avoid the use of the product until there was public acceptance."Narration: Maybe you recall these media reports from 1994 when Albertsons reassured Florida consumers "Swe will do our utmost to ensure that (people) don't get it" in their milk. Publix issued similar assurances.The truth is, nobody ever did anything but go through the motions of asking farmers to keep BGH out of the milk supply. And when we visited seven Central Florida dairyoperations chosen at random,how many were heeding the grocers' request? Not a one.Albertsons acknowledged: "It is widely accepted in the industry that most all dairy farmers now use BGH" but "we do not know which or how many dairies use it.".

But not everybody's using it. Ben and Jerry, America's icons of ice cream,don't want anything to do with it. and they're leading the fight to give you a choice at the grocer's dairy case.Part IVBen Cohen, Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream: "A big part of the issue is that consumers are well aware that what the FDA said was fine and healthy 10 and 20 years ago, the FDA is saying is really bad for you today.Narration: It's one of the big reasons Ben and Jerry, makers of some of America's favorite ice cream, are so opposed to farmers injecting their dairy cows with Bovine Growth Hormone genetically engineered in a Monsanto chemical lab.Narration: Our investigation has found only one dairy in Florida which produces milk from cows not treated with BGH and what happened when the folks at the Golden Fleece dairy in Central Florida wanted to label their products as synthetic BGH-free?Well, first they say Commissioner Crawford's people strongly discouraged it,but what really deterred them was a fear Monsanto -the company which makes the hormone - would come after them in court.Glen Norton, Golden Fleece Dairy: "From the information I heard and read, I was afraid at some point that if we tried to do extra labeling, that Monsanto could cause damage to my small, fragile business."Narration: Norton and others like him may have reason to be scared. Right after Monsanto started marketing its BGH three years ago, a number of dairies that didn't use it began to label their products so consumers would know.Robert Collier: "In fact, there are quite a few co-ops that do just that and we have not opposed that at all."Narration: But that's not true. Monsanto did file lawsuits against two small dairies, forcing them to stop labeling. Then the company spread the news with follow-up letters to other dairies that apparently saw the writing on the wall.and they also stopped.The labels on Ben and Jerry's ice cream will soon be different, too. The label will also carry wording that says the FDA has said there is no significant difference between milk from treated and untreated cows - aclaim some scientists sharply question.That wording, by the way, was written by Michael Taylor, an attorney who worked for Monsanto both before and after his time as an FDA official.Some dairy people say Ben and Jerry have jumped on the anti-BGH bandwagon asjust a way to sell more of their ice cream.Ben Cohen: "The tremendous amount of chemicals that's used in conventional agriculture is having a horrible effect on the environment and on the health of our citizens and our customers and you know, (laugh), if you want to sayis it our self-interest? Yeah! We want to keep our customers alive. They eat more ice cream when they're alive!"Narration: As part of an effort to influence these reports, a lawyer hired by Monsanto wrote a Fox television executive saying the discussion of anypossible link between the use of synthetic BGH and cancer is ".the most blatant form of scaremongering."In a second letter, he said Monsanto critics are in all probability "scientifically incompetent." He is referring to critics such as Dr. Samuel Epstein at the University of Illinois School of Public Health. Epstein hasthree medical degrees, he's the author of eight books, and is frequently called to testify before Congress about theenvironmental causes of cancer.Like other BGH critics, Epstein contends it's just wrong to introduce a product into the marketplace when there are so many important and still-unresolved human health questions.Samuel Epstein, Research Scientist: "We're living in the greatest democracy in the world in many ways but in other ways were in a corporate dictatorship in which big government and big industry decide what information the consumer can and should have and it's the objective of me and the Cancer Prevention Coalition to assure that this information be made available andlet the public decide.and let grassrootcitizens take over where government and industry has failed."This is the first time that the script that got the reporters in trouble has appeared in print. This important document has been edited for length but not censored. For the full version, go to the website: http://www.foxbghsuit.comEarth Island Journal - Summer 2001 Vol. 16 #2DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT:This is an excellent example of the challenge that that truth frequently faces in getting to the public. This information is not presented through the media as a result of economic and political pressures.I am delighted to be able to work with Dr. Epstein in promoting some of his outstanding efforts to inform the public about some of these dangers. If you live in Illinois please be sure and attend the Symposium he is sponsoring next month.

If you are still drinking regular milk I would encourage you to discontinue this practice as soon as possible. The growth hormone issues discussed above are only one of the reasons why this should be considered.The major issue is the pasteurization of the milk which completely changes the structure of the milk proteins (denaturization) into something far less than healthy. Then, of course there is the issue of the antibiotics and pesticides and the fact that nearly all commercial dairy cows are raised on grains, not grass, like theywere designed to. This will change thecomposition of the fats, especially the CLA content.JoAnn Guest jgu-Friendsforhea- DietaryTi- http://www.geocities.com/mrsjoguest/Botanicals.htmlhttp://www.geocities.com/mrsjoguest/AIM.html

Here is another link you might want to read as well.http://www.hans.org/web_newsviews/h06disorddisease/h0695doctorwarnsofbreastc.htmlDo you ?

Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now