GMW: New ag journal funded by Monsanto/Monsanto's Hormonal Milk Poses Greater Ri

[Guest guest]

GMW: New ag journal funded by Monsanto/Monsanto's Hormonal

Milk Poses Greater Risks Than Just Twinning

" GM WATCH " <info

Tue, 29 Aug 2006 20:48:19 +0100

 

 

 

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

---

---

1.New ag journal funded by Monsanto - GM Watch

2.Hormonal Milk Poses Greater Risks Than Just Twinning - Prof Samuel S.

Epstein

---

---

1.New ag journal funded by Monsanto

 

Land agent Mark Griffiths tells us a recent David Richardson column in

the UK's Farmers Weekly magazine (18 Aug, p39), referred to a new

agricultural journal called 'Inside Agriculture.'

 

Mark writes, 'Chaired by Prof Sir Colin Spedding (it includes other

luminaries such as Prof Sir John Marsh). Upcoming articles include " The

fallacy of organic agriculture " and " Genetically modified crops; public

perceptions in Europe, risk and reality " , and " New chemicals and genes

for agriculture, food, fuel and healthcare. " '

 

'According to Richardson, " This first edition appears to have been

funded by Monsanto if the advertisments on the front and back covers are

any guide. I understand other advertisers will be sought to fund future

editions thereby helping to preserve scientific independence " . A

scientific journal funded by advertisers???'

 

'David Richardson says " It won't be as popular as Farmers Weekly. But

if it is read by the right people - opinion formers, who can influence

others - it will become a valuable addition to the reference base of our

industry and may help keep interest in agriculture research alive " .'

---

2.Hormonal Milk Poses Greater Risks Than Just Twinning

http://www.newstarget.com/020212.html

 

Following is commentary by Samuel S. Epstein, M.D., professor emeritus

of environmental and occupational medicine at the University of

Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health and Chairman of the Cancer

Prevention Coalition. Epstein is author of the new book, " What's in Your

Milk? "

 

 

As widely covered in the national media, a recent article by Dr. Gary

Steinman in The Journal of Reproductive Medicine reported that women

drinking milk and eating dairy products from cows injected with

Monsanto's

genetically engineered growth hormone drug are up to five times more

likely to risk giving birth to fraternal twins than non-dairy product

vegans.

 

This news is hardly surprising. Hormonal milk contains up to ten-fold

increased levels of the natural Insulin-like Growth Factor, known as

IGF, long known to increase ovulation and twinning rates in cows. The

hormone also makes cows sick. Monsanto has been forced to admit to 20

toxic

veterinary effects on its drug label.

 

Monsanto has also recently admitted that about one third of dairy cows

in the nation are now in herds where the hormone is used.

 

Hormonal milk is very different than natural milk.

 

Hormonal milk is often contaminated with pus cells, resulting from

mastitis in cows due to hyperstimulation of milk production, and also

with

antibiotics used to treat the mastitis. Other abnormalities include

increased fatty acids, which are incriminated in heart disease.

 

More serious are major risks of breast, colon, and prostate cancers due

to increased IGF levels in hormonal milk. Evidence for this has been

documented in about 50 scientific publications over the past three

decades. Among them is the 1998 Harvard Nurses Health Study, based on a

follow-up of 300 healthy nurses. Those with elevated IGF blood levels

were

shown to have up to a seven-fold increased risk of breast cancer.

 

A less well-recognized risk is evidence that IGF blocks natural,

self-destructive, defense mechanisms against early submicroscopic

cancers,

technically known as apoptosis.

 

Acting on these lines of evidence, a 1999 European Commission Report,

by internationally recognized experts, concluded that avoidance of

hormonal dairy products in favor of natural organic products " would

appear

to be the most practical and immediate dietary intervention to . . .

achieve the goal of preventing cancer. " Warning of these risks were

confirmed in my 2002 publication in the International Journal of Health

Services, endorsed by over 50 leading independent experts in cancer

prevention and public health.

 

Of particular concern are risks to infants and children in view of

their high susceptibility to cancer-causing products and chemicals.

Nevertheless, few schools make organic milk available, nor do most state

governments, under low-income food programs, particularly the Special

Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children.

 

Nevertheless, the Food and Drug Administration remains indifferent to

these risks, in spite of Congressional concerns. Illustrative is the

1986 report, " Human Food Safety and Regulation of Animal Drugs, " by the

House Committee on Government Operations. This concluded that the " FDA

has consistently disregarded its responsibility---has repeatedly put what

it perceives are interests of veterinarians and the livestock industry

ahead of its legal obligations to protect consumers--jeopardizing the

health and safety of consumers of meat, milk, and poultry. "

 

However, these risks are avoidable. According to The Hartman Group, a

prominent Seattle consulting firm, organic milk is now among the first

organic product that consumers buy. Organic milk is also becoming

increasingly available, with an annual growth rate of about 20

percent, while

overall milk consumption is dropping by about 10 percent.

 

Wal-Mart is now the biggest seller of certified organic milk, followed

by Horizon Organic, owned by Dean Foods, the nations largest dairy

producer, and by Groupe Danone, the leading French dairy company. While

growth in this market is still held back by the higher price of organic

milk, this problem is likely to be resolved by Wal-Mart's competitive

pricing.

 

In sharp contrast to the U.S., 24 European nations, Norway,

Switzerland, New Zealand, Japan, and Canada have banned the use and

imports of

hormonal milk and dairy products. However, in spite of the ban, Canada

imports over 20 percent of its total dairy products from the U.S.,

without

any restrictions.

 

Our government has failed to warn its citizens of the dangers of

hormonal milk. The media could now play a critical role in alerting the

nation to these avoidable dangers.

 

 

 

 

-------------------------