Mice have spoken . . .

[Guest guest]

From Aerielle Louise ;-)

Talk Radio Network

July 9, 2002

 

The Mice have spoken . . .

 

" . . .the mice delivered their own verdict. They completely

emptied the bowls containing the non-GM food. The bowls

with GM food remained untouched. . . "

 

An interesting report from THE ECOLOGIST, vol. 32, #5, June

2002 page 33

 

The mice it would appear are brighter than the supermarket

shoppers.!

 

The mice didn't believe the politicians - all too often the

sheeple do.

 

GE food study done by Dutch teen

 

Mice Reject Genetically Engineered Food

 

Following is from a British journal (June 2002) excerpt:

 

" While the International scientific community spares no

effort in branding GM food as " substantially equivalent' to

conventional food (essentially so as to prop up the ailing

biotech industry), a 17-year- old Dutch undergraduate has

created scientific history with some simple & disturbing

experiments on mice. "

 

by Devinder Sharma

 

Excerpt:

 

" Hinze Hogendoorn conclusively demonstrated that not

everything endorsed by Nobel laureates & other so-called

authorities like the UK's Royal Society is scientifically

correct. Hogendoorn may not find a place of honour in the

pro-GM stuffed Royal Society, but he has surely put the

august body to shame.

 

Following basic scientific conventions, H. conducted his

experiments on mice. He picked up 30 female 6-week-old mice

from a herpetology centre. These rodents were originally

bred to feed snakes.

 

Then, like any other net-savvy teenager, he searched the web

for information on how to take care of mice. Accordingly, he

bought some rodent mix, some Kellogg's and Quaker cereals

and some oatmeal that was specified to be 'GM-free'. H.

also bought some GM maize and soya. These foodstuffs were

to form the staple diet for the mice.

 

The mice were let loose in big cages with 2 piles of

food--one GM and one non GM--stacked in 4 bowls. Unaware of

received opinion on the virtues of GM 'functional foods',

the mice delivered their own verdict. They completely

emptied the bowls containing the non-GM food. The bowls

with GM food remained untouched.

 

But H. was still not satisfied. He conducted a series of

other tests to find out what would happen when the mice were

force-fed with GM foods.

 

Significantly, but for unknown reasons, one of the mice

died. The other GM-fed mice initially appeared heavier, but

by the end of the experiment they had actually lost weight.

A rival group of mice was fed a non-GM diet.

 

These mice ate less and gained more weight, and continued to

gain weight.

 

Equally sorrying were the behavioural changes that the diet

induced in the mice. The GM-fed mice 'seemed less active',

more nervous & distressed'and were completely at a loss.

'Many,' Hogendoorn was quoted as saying, 'were running round

and round the basket, scrabbling desperately in the sawdust,

& even frantically jumping up the sides--something I'd never

seen before.'

 

The Royal Society has so far refrained from commenting on

H's experiments........................As a face-saving

device, it has drawn attention to the potential risks GM

foods pose for babies. The latter are particularly

susceptible to changes in the nutritional make-up of food.

 

But the Royal Society report is full of contradictions. It

states that consumption of genetically modified DNA has no

effect on human health. Are babies not human? "

 

from article in THE ECOLOGIST, vol. 32, #5, June 2002 page

33