The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) has recently reported a link between genetically modified (GM) foods and adverse health effects. The AAEM is advising precaution because GM foods have not been properly tested for human consumption and because there is significant evidence of probable harm. Therefore they advise:
Physicians to educate their patients, the medical community, and the public to avoid GM foods when possible and provide educational materials concerning GM foods and health risks.
Physicians to consider the possible role of GM foods in the disease processes of the patients they treat and to document any changes in patient health when changing from GM food to non-GM food.
Our members, the medical community, and the independent scientific community to gather case studies potentially related to GM food consumption and health effects, begin epidemiological research to investigate the role of GM foods on human health, and conduct safe methods of determining the effect of GM foods on human health.
For a moratorium on GM food, implementation of immediate long term independent safety testing, and labeling of GM foods, which is necessary for the health and safety of consumers.
But why should GM producers like Monsanto be concerned with this? One Monsanto official told the New York Times that the corporation should not have to take responsibility for the safety of its food products.
“Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food,” said Phil Angell, Monsanto’s director of corporate communications. “Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job.”
As the Organic Consumers Association shares, it would be nice to think the FDA can be trusted with these matters, but think again. Monsanto has succeeded in ensuring that government regulatory agencies let Monsanto do as it wishes.
To offer up one glaring example as reported on the Organic Consumers Association’sMillions Against Monsanto website:
In order for the FDA to determine if Monsanto’s growth hormones were safe or not, Monsanto was required to submit a scientific report on that topic. Margaret Miller, one of Monsanto’s researchers put the report together.
Shortly before the report submission, Miller left Monsanto and was hired by the FDA. Her first job for the FDA was to determine whether or not to approve the report she wrote for Monsanto. In short, Monsanto approved its own report. Assisting Miller was another former Monsanto researcher, Susan Sechen. Deciding whether or not rBGH-derived milk should be labeled fell under the jurisdiction of another FDA official, Michael Taylor, who previously worked as a lawyer for Monsanto.
Scary.
The AAEM report is also big news because it ads validity to the numerous studies outside the US which link GMO’s (and Roundup) to poor health.
Like Sweden’s recent study by two of their country’s top oncologists, Dr. Lennart Hardell and Dr. Mikael Eriksson, illustrating clear links between glyphosate in Roundup to a form of cancer called non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
Monsanto has even created a more lethal form of Roundup for use in Columbia.
More on Roundup and human cell damage.
To any GM newbies out there you will hear Roundup weed killer and genetically modified organisms referred to in many of the same reports. That is because major GM crop producer Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready” crops have been genetically modified to allow direct application of the Monsanto herbicide glyphosate (aka Roundup) allowing farmers to drench both their crops and crop land with the herbicide so as to be able to kill nearby weeds (and any other green thing the herbicide touches) without killing the crops.
source: planetsave, joe mohr
