Health warning:  transgenic foods not safe to eat1, 2, 3

First published in Organic NZ, September/October 2009 Vol 68 No 5 www.organiz.org

Reprinted here with permission from Physicians and Scientists for Global Responsibility (PSGR) who provide the material for the ONZ Science Watch page - www.psgr.org.nz

 

The World Health Organization describes genetically engineered organisms as: “Organisms in which the genetic material (DNA) has been altered in such a way that does not occur naturally.”2

Used safely for millennia, natural breeding processes are polarly opposite to genetic engineering (GE) technology. GE usurps natural reproductive processes and has been used commercially for little more than a decade. It is mutagenic and routinely breeches species barriers.

Safety assessments have assumed that foods produced using conventional and transgenic methods are substantially equivalent and thus GE foods are as safe to ingest as traditional foods.

For your information: Genetic engineering (GE) is also commonly referred to as genetic modification, biotechnology, genetic transformation, recombinant DNA technology and by other name tags. GE consists of randomly inserting genetic fragments of DNA from one organism to another, from like or different species. Commercial applications include, for example, an artificial combination of genes to include a gene to produce the pesticide Cry1Ab protein (commonly known as Bt toxin), originally found in Bacillus thuringiensis, much used by organic growers.

What animal studies show1, 3

Animal studies have found more than a casual association between GE foods and adverse health effects. In terms of Hill's Criteria4 causation is demonstrated through strength of association, consistency, specificity, biological gradient, and biological plausibility.

Health risks associated with consumption of genetically engineered foods include infertility and accelerated aging, immune dysregulation and dysregulation of genes associated with cholesterol synthesis, insulin regulation, cell signalling and protein formation, and changes in the liver, kidney, spleen and gastrointestinal system. The studies also support the association of GE foods and specific disease processes: e.g. immune dysregulation, including upregulation of cytokines associated with asthma, allergy, and inflammation. They show altered structure and function of the liver and changes in the kidney, pancreas and spleen.

A study carried out in 2008, links GE corn with infertility and lower litter weight in mice fed GE corn. Significant also is that over 400 genes were found to be expressed differently in the mice fed GE corn - genes known to control protein synthesis and modification, cell signalling, cholesterol synthesis, and insulin regulation. Intestinal damage in animals fed GE foods included proliferative cell growth and disruption of the intestinal immune system. Rats fed Bt rice trended to a dose-related response for Bt specific IgA (Kroghsbo, et al.). (IgA - immunoglobulin A - is a major class of immunoglobulins found in serum and external body secretions such as saliva and tears.)

Do humans react to GE foods?3, 5

The data are mounting to show that it is biologically plausible, indeed probable, for transgenic foods to cause adverse health effects in humans. For example, transgenic soy and corn each contain two new proteins with allergenic properties. GE soy has up to seven times more of the known soy allergen, trypsin inhibitor. Skin prick tests have shown some people react to GE, but not to non-GE soy.

There has been only one published human feeding study, of one meal eaten by human volunteers.5 It found that the gene inserted into the engineered soy transferred into the DNA of bacteria living inside the intestines of the participants and continued to function there. The obvious conclusion was that long after we stop eating GE foods, potentially harmful transgenic proteins could continue production in our gut. 

Since the mid 1990s, US citizens have eaten increasing quantities of GE foods. Within a relatively short time, US doctors began noticing an increase in gastrointestinal problems among patients.  And in the first nine years of that period, the incidence of US citizens with three or more chronic diseases nearly doubled, from 7% to 13%.6

AAEM President, Dr Jennifer Armstrong, says: “Physicians are probably seeing the effects in their patients, but need to know how to ask the right questions.”

So why plant transgenic crops?

One main industry claim is that GE foods can feed the starving millions by producing higher crop yields. A recent report7 from the Union of Concerned Scientists reviewing 12 academic studies found: “The several thousand field trials over the last 20 years for genes aimed at increasing operational or intrinsic yield (of crops) indicate a significant undertaking. Yet none of these field trials have resulted in increased yield in commercialised major food/feed crops, with the exception of Bt corn.” Even this increase, it was stated, is largely due to traditional breeding improvements.

Doctors’ concerns

In May of this year, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM)1 announced that GE foods pose a serious health risk in the areas of toxicology, allergy and immune function, reproductive health, and metabolic, physiologic and genetic health, and are without benefit. It believes that it is imperative to adopt the precautionary principle.

In making its announcement, the AAEM asks doctors to *educate patients, the medical community and the public to avoid GE foods, and to provide educational material concerning GE foods and potential health risks, to *consider the potential role of GE foods in disease processes, and to *document changes in patient health when changing from GE food to non-GE food.

The AAEM also asks its members, the medical community, and the independent scientific community to gather case studies potentially related to GE food consumption and health effects, begin epidemiological research to investigate the role of GE foods on human health, and conduct safe methods of determining the effect of GE foods on human health.

Finally, the AAEM wants a moratorium on all transgenic food, immediate long-term, independent safety testing, and labelling of GE foods.

The precautionary principle:  PSGR maintains that when an activity raises threats to human health or the environment, precautionary measures must be taken, whether cause and effect relationships are established scientifically or not. The proponent, not the public, should bear the cost of independent proof of safety.

 

Footnote: The American Academy of Environmental Medicine1 (AAEM), founded in 1965, is an international association of physicians and other professionals interested in the clinical aspects and interactions between human individuals and their environment, as these may be demonstrated to be reflected in their total health. www.aaemonline.org.

 

What happens when animals are fed genetically engineered food or other crops?

Animals fed GE soy

  1. Female rats produced smaller babies and most died within three weeks, compared to a 10% death rate in a control group fed natural soy.

  2. Mice fed GE soy produced altered young sperm. 

  3. The embryos of GE fed parent mice had significant changes in their DNA. 

Animals fed GE corn

  1. In an Austrian government study, mice had fewer babies that were smaller than normal.

  2. In the US, pigs had false pregnancies, gave birth to bags of water, or became sterile after consuming GE corn varieties.

  3. Cows and bulls also became infertile when fed the same corn.

  4. In November 2008, the Italian government announced that mice have an immune reaction to Bt corn.

  5. Monsanto researchers found significant immune system changes in rats fed Bt corn. 

  6. Bt corn has been indicated in the deaths of cows in Germany, and horses, water buffaloes, and chickens in the Philippines. 

Animals fed GE cotton

  1. In Haryana, India, buffalo eating GE cottonseed developed premature deliveries, abortions, infertility, and prolapsed uteruses, and many calves died.  In Andhra Pradesh, buffalo grazed conventional cotton plants for years without incident. After eating Bt cotton plants for the first time, all died within three days.

  1. Post mortems on sheep that died after grazing on Bt cotton plants showed severe irritation and black patches in intestines and liver, and enlarged bile ducts.  A follow-up feeding study found all sheep fed Bt cotton plants died within 30 days; those that grazed on natural cotton plants remained healthy. Of 2601 sheep, 651 sheep died; a crude mortality rate of 25%.8

 

How you can avoid genetically engineering foods

 

 

For further information see:

 

GE Free New Zealand in food and environment www.gefree.org.nz/

GE Free Northland in food and environment http://web.gefreenorthland.org.nz/

Physicians and Scientists for Global Responsibility www.psgr.org.nz/

Sustainability Council of New Zealand http://www.sustainabilitynz.org/

The Soil & Health Association / Organic New Zealand http://organicnz.org.nz/

 

 

 References:

1. www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html

2. WHO, ‘Foods derived from modern technology: 20 questions on genetically modified foods,’ www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/biotech/20questions/en/index.html

3 Jeffrey M Smith, ‘Doctors Warn: Avoid Genetically Modified Food’

4. Hill, A B. The environment and disease: association or causation? Proceeding of the Royal

Society of Medicine 1965; 58:295-300.

5. www.newscientist.com/article/dn2565-gm-crop-dna-found-in-human-gut-bugs.html

6. Kathryn Anne Paez, et al, “Rising Out-Of-Pocket Spending For Chronic Conditions: A Ten-Year Trend,” Health Affairs, 28, no. 1 (2009): 15-25.

7. www.ucsusa.org/spotlights/Failure-to-Yield-Evaluating-the-Performance-of-Genetically-Engineered-Crops-2009.html

8. www.indiagminfo.org/updates/April%202006-FFT%20rpt-anthra-csa-union.pdf