PUS IS IN MILK/monsanto connection

[Guest guest]

The Monsanto connection

 

In 1994 the FDA approved the use of recombinant bovine somatotropin (rBST --

better known as bovine growth hormone -- BGH), a genetically-engineered

hormone manufactured by Monsanto that increases milk production in cows by

10 percent to 25 percent. The milk from cows treated with BGH contains

elevated levels insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), one of the most

powerful growth factors ever identified. While IGF-1 doesn't cause cancer,

it definitely stimulates its growth. Recent studies have found a seven-fold

increase in the risk of breast cancer in women with the highest IGF-1

levels, and a four-fold increase in prostate cancer in men with the highest

levels of IGF-1.

 

BGH is banned in both Canada and Europe. BGH-treated cows are also more

likely to contract mastitis, a persistent infection of the cows' udders.

These cows are then treated with a myriad of antibiotics and sulfa drugs.

Trace amounts of these drugs as well as pus and bacteria from the infected

udders are also found in their milk. Many of these antibiotics, even in

trace amounts, can cause allergic reactions -- from mild reactions such as

hives to anaphylactic shock.

 

The role of Monsanto, one of the world's largest chemical corporations and

developer of the terminator gene for seed crops, in the willful adulteration

and contamination of milk must be considered. Monsanto, also one of the

world's most prolific polluters, intends to control the world's food supply

by making sure that farmers must come back and purchase its seed year after

year because terminator gene-containing plants will not produce viable seed.

Monsanto also developed the FDA-approved bovine growth hormone that

increases production at the expense of the cow and the health of the adults

and children who drink the milk.

 

Kloss' statement, which cannot be interpreted as ìvagueî or confusing, was

published long before Monsanto was able to further contaminate milk with

bovine growth hormone. If cow's milk was ìunfit for human consumptionî in

1939, has Monsanto and the FDA, with the introduction and approval of BGH,

made it more or less fit than it was before WWII?

 

 

################################################################

 

> " Sill " <thesills

>I don't think I've missed the point at all, really. Dairy farms are VERY

>careful about things such as mastitis and other infections. Why??? because

>it ruins their production levels tremendously.

>If you've ever had mastitis, you would know that it can deplete the milk

>supply and if not properly cared for can ruin lactation completely.

>My husband worked on a hog farm for a long time and my uncle ran a dairy in

>Ohio. Both of these operations are festidious about disease and infection.

>They are also inspected constantly. Believe me, the government would love

>to nab a large dairy for keeping 'dirty' cows because BIG fines are

>involved

> Who do you think the dairies pay the fines to? The consumers? Not

>usually. LOL!

>While the milk we buy in stores has its problems (growth hormones,

>antibiotics, etc.), puss is not one of them.

>

> Blessed Be!

>MtMoonKitty

 

_______________

The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*

http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

[Guest guest]

The link to the full story is as follows:

 

http://www.mercola.com/1999/archive/dont_get_milk.htm

 

 

Well, at Least Cow's Milk Is Pure

(purely disgusting)

 

Or is it? Fifty years ago an average cow produced 2,000 pounds of milk per

year. Today the top producers give 50,000 pounds! How was this accomplished?

Drugs, antibiotics, hormones, forced feeding plans and specialized breeding;

that's how.

 

The latest high-tech onslaught on the poor cow is bovine growth hormone or

BGH. This genetically engineered drug is supposed to stimulate milk

production but, according to Monsanto, the hormone's manufacturer, does not

affect the milk or meat. There are three other manufacturers: Upjohn, Eli

Lilly, and American Cyanamid Company. Obviously, there have been no

long-term studies on the hormone's effect on the humans drinking the milk.

Other countries have banned BGH because of safety concerns. One of the

problems with adding molecules to a milk cows' body is that the molecules

usually come out in the milk. I don't know how you feel, but I don't want to

experiment with the ingestion of a growth hormone. A related problem is that

it causes a marked increase (50 to 70 per cent) in mastitis. This, then,

requires antibiotic therapy, and the residues of the antibiotics appear in

the milk. It seems that the public is uneasy about this product and in one

survey 43 per cent felt that growth hormone treated milk represented a

health risk. A vice president for public policy at Monsanto was opposed to

labelling for that reason, and because the labelling would create an

" artificial distinction " . The country is awash with milk as it is, we

produce more milk than we can consume. Let’s not create storage costs and

further taxpayer burdens, because the law requires the USDA to buy any

surplus of butter, cheese, or non-fat dry milk at a support price set by

Congress! In fiscal 1991, the USDA spent $757 million on surplus butter, and

one billion dollars a year on average for price supports during the 1980s

(Consumer Reports, May 1992: 330-32).

 

Any lactating mammal excretes toxins through her milk. This includes

antibiotics, pesticides, chemicals and hormones. Also, all cows' milk

contains blood! The inspectors are simply asked to keep it under certain

limits. You may be horrified to learn that the USDA allows milk to contain

from one to one and a half million white blood cells per milliliter. (That’s

only 1/30 of an ounce). If you don’t already know this, I’m sorry to tell

you that another way to describe white cells where they don’t belong would

be to call them pus cells. To get to the point, is milk pure or is it a

chemical, biological, and bacterial cocktail? Finally, will the Food and

Drug Administration (FDA) protect you? The United States General Accounting

Office (GAO) tells us that the FDA and the individual States are failing to

protect the public from drug residues in milk. Authorities test for only 4

of the 82 drugs in dairy cows.

 

As you can imagine, the Milk Industry Foundation's spokesman claims it's

perfectly safe. Jerome Kozak says, " I still think that milk is the safest

product we have. "

 

Other, perhaps less biased observers, have found the following: 38% of milk

samples in 10 cities were contaminated with sulfa drugs or other

antibiotics. (This from the Centre for Science in the Public Interest and

The Wall Street Journal, Dec. 29, 1989).. A similar study in Washington, DC

found a 20 percent contamination rate (Nutrition Action Healthletter, April

1990).

 

What’s going on here? When the FDA tested milk, they found few problems.

However, they used very lax standards. When they used the same criteria ,

the FDA data showed 51 percent of the milk samples showed drug traces.

 

Let’s focus in on this because it’s critical to our understanding of the

apparent discrepancies. The FDA uses a disk-assay method that can detect

only 2 of the 30 or so drugs found in milk. Also, the test detects only at

the relatively high level. A more powerful test called the " Charm II test "

can detect 4o drugs down to 5 parts per billion.

 

One nasty subject must be discussed. It seems that cows are forever getting

infections around the udder that require ointments and antibiotics. An

article from France tells us that when a cow receives penicillin, that

penicillin appears in the milk for from 4 to 7 milkings. Another study from

the University of Nevada, Reno tells of cells in " mastic milk " , milk from

cows with infected udders. An elaborate analysis of the cell fragments,

employing cell cultures, flow cytometric analysis , and a great deal of high

tech stuff. Do you know what the conclusion was? If the cow has mastitis,

there is pus in the milk. Sorry, it’s in the study, all concealed with

language such as " ¼macrophages containing many vacuoles and phagocytosed

particles, etc. "

Pam has copied and pasted and I would LOVE to paste

more..................................................................I " m

biting my tongue.

 

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

 

 

> " Sill " <thesills

>I don't think I've missed the point at all, really. Dairy farms are VERY

>careful about things such as mastitis and other infections. Why??? because

>it ruins their production levels tremendously.

>If you've ever had mastitis, you would know that it can deplete the milk

>supply and if not properly cared for can ruin lactation completely.

>My husband worked on a hog farm for a long time and my uncle ran a dairy in

>Ohio. Both of these operations are festidious about disease and infection.

>They are also inspected constantly. Believe me, the government would love

>to nab a large dairy for keeping 'dirty' cows because BIG fines are

>involved

> Who do you think the dairies pay the fines to? The consumers? Not

>usually. LOL!

>While the milk we buy in stores has its problems (growth hormones,

>antibiotics, etc.), puss is not one of them.

>

> Blessed Be!

>MtMoonKitty

 

_______________

Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online

http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

[Guest guest]

Good article PT.

Wouldn't you know it.

Monsanto again.

Sheesh.

Doc

 

Ian " Doc " Shillington N.D.

505-772-5889

Dr.IanShillington

-

" Pee Tee " <peetee1965

<herbal remedies >

Monday, July 21, 2003 2:22 PM

Re: [herbal remedies] PUS IS IN MILK/monsanto connection

 

 

> The Monsanto connection

>

> In 1994 the FDA approved the use of recombinant bovine somatotropin

(rBST --

> better known as bovine growth hormone -- BGH), a genetically-engineered

> hormone manufactured by Monsanto that increases milk production in cows by

> 10 percent to 25 percent. The milk from cows treated with BGH contains

> elevated levels insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), one of the most

> powerful growth factors ever identified. While IGF-1 doesn't cause cancer,

> it definitely stimulates its growth. Recent studies have found a

seven-fold

> increase in the risk of breast cancer in women with the highest IGF-1

> levels, and a four-fold increase in prostate cancer in men with the

highest

> levels of IGF-1.

>

> BGH is banned in both Canada and Europe. BGH-treated cows are also more

> likely to contract mastitis, a persistent infection of the cows' udders.

> These cows are then treated with a myriad of antibiotics and sulfa drugs.

> Trace amounts of these drugs as well as pus and bacteria from the infected

> udders are also found in their milk. Many of these antibiotics, even in

> trace amounts, can cause allergic reactions -- from mild reactions such as

> hives to anaphylactic shock.

>

> The role of Monsanto, one of the world's largest chemical corporations and

> developer of the terminator gene for seed crops, in the willful

adulteration

> and contamination of milk must be considered. Monsanto, also one of the

> world's most prolific polluters, intends to control the world's food

supply

> by making sure that farmers must come back and purchase its seed year

after

> year because terminator gene-containing plants will not produce viable

seed.

> Monsanto also developed the FDA-approved bovine growth hormone that

> increases production at the expense of the cow and the health of the

adults

> and children who drink the milk.

>

> Kloss' statement, which cannot be interpreted as ìvagueî or confusing, was

> published long before Monsanto was able to further contaminate milk with

> bovine growth hormone. If cow's milk was ìunfit for human consumptionî in

> 1939, has Monsanto and the FDA, with the introduction and approval of BGH,

> made it more or less fit than it was before WWII?