Before I leap headlong into the promised topic, however, I have a confession to make: I've been secretly testing the idea of a weekly Food Politics column... on you. So far, they've gotten a modest amount of play, so I'm going to bite the bullet and declare myself. This is Friday Food Politics IV.
Previous installments (to prove that it really is #4):
Food Politics I: Let Them Eat Blue's Clues Mac & Cheese
Food Politics II: Eating Their Vegetables
Food Politics III: Carlyle Group to buy... Dunkin' Donuts?
So anyway, rat babies. A new Russian study found that genetically-modified soy flour, added to the food of pregnant and nursing female rats, greatly increased the mortality of their young. Here's an account of the study, which I just have to quote from directly, because of its adorably bad translation from the Russian (on the flip):
On October 10, during the symposium over genetic modification, organized by the National Association for Genetic Security (NAGS), Doctor of Biology Irina Ermakova made public the results of the research led by her at the Institute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS). This is the first research that determined clear dependence between eating genetically modified soy and the posterity of living creatures.
During the experiment, doctor Ermakova added GM soy flour to the food of female rats two weeks before conception, during conception and nursing. In the control group were the rat females that were not added anything to their food. The experiment was formed by 3 groups of 3 female rats in each: the first one was control group, the second one was the group with GM-soy addition, and the third one with traditional soy addition. The scientists counted the number of female species to give birth and the number of born and died rats.
After the result of the first stage, the second part took place. Now the rats were divided into two groups - one with GM-soy addition in their food, and other without the GM-soy. In three weeks the scientists received following results:
I'll just summarize them. The group fed standard soy flour had three mortalities among 33 offspring (9%); the groups fed no soy flour at all had 3 mortalities among 44 offspring (7%); the groups fed GM soy flour had 25 (yes, twenty-five) mortalities among 45 offspring (56%).
That's a pretty huge difference. Now, obviously the number of rats involved in this study was very small, and it needs to be replicated on a larger scale. But these preliminary findings are really fairly shocking. 56% mortality? Yikes!
Furthermore, 36% of the rats born to the GM-soy mothers were less than 20 grams, very small and weak. Here is a picture of one of these rats next to a normally-sized one (thanks, PhillyGal!):
"'The morphology and biochemical structures of rats are very similar to those of humans, and this makes the results we obtained very disturbing,' said Irina Ermakova to NAGS press office."
Jeffrey M. Smith, Director of the Institute for Responsible Technology and author of bestseller Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry and Government Lies about the Safety of the Genetically Engineered Foods You're Eating, noted that the soy Ermakova was testing was Monsanto's Roundup Ready, which constitutes about 85% of soy grown in the U.S.. Roundup Ready has bacterial genes that allow it to survive applications of Monsanto's "Roundup" herbicide. Says Smith, "Since soy derivatives, including oil, flour and lecithin, are found in the majority of processed foods sold in the US, many Americans eat ingredients derived from Roundup Ready soy every day."
More from Smith (I have deleted his footnotes, but he does have them!):
Other studies on Roundup Ready soy also raise serious questions. Research on the liver, the body's major de-toxifier, showed that rats fed GM soy developed misshapen nuclei and other cellular anomalies. This indicates increased metabolic activity, probably resulting from a major insult to that organ. Rats also showed changes in the pancreas, including a huge drop in the production of a major enzyme (alpha-amylase), which could inhibit digestion. Cooked GM soy contains about twice the amount of soy lectin, which can also block nutrient assimilation. And one study showed that GM soy has 12-14% less isoflavones, which are touted as cancer fighting.
An animal feeding study published by Monsanto showed no apparent problems with GM soy, but their research has been severely criticized as rigged to avoid finding problems. Monsanto used mature animals instead of young, more sensitive ones, diluted their GM soy up to 12-fold, used too much protein, never weighed the organs, and had huge variations in starting weights. The study's nutrient comparison between GM and non-GM soy revealed significant differences in the ash, fat, and carbohydrate content, lower levels of protein, a fatty acid, and phenylalanine. Monsanto researchers had actually omitted the most incriminating nutritional differences, which were later discovered and made public. For example, the published paper showed a 27% increase in a known allergen, trypsin inhibitor, while the recovered data raised that to a 3-fold or 7-fold increase, after the soy was cooked. This might explain why soy allergies in the UK skyrocketed by 50% soon after GM soy was introduced.
The gene that is inserted into GM soy produces a protein with two sections that are identical to known allergens. This might also account for the increased allergy rate. Furthermore, the only human feeding trial ever conducted confirmed that this inserted gene transfers into the DNA of bacteria inside the intestines. This means that long after you decide to stop eating GM soy, your own gut bacteria may still be producing this potentially allergenic protein inside your digestive tract.
Smith emphasizes the importance of replicating Ermakova's limited results, but then inserts the following startling caveat:
Unfortunately, there is a feature about GM crops that makes even follow-up studies a problem. In 2003, a French laboratory analyzed the inserted genes in five GM varieties, including Roundup Ready soybeans. In each case, the genetic sequence was different than that which had been described by the biotech companies years earlier. Had all the companies made a mistake? That's unlikely. Rather, the inserted genes probably rearranged over time. A Brussels lab confirmed that the genetic sequences were different than what was originally listed. But the sequences discovered in Brussels didn't all match those found by the French. This suggests that the inserted genes are unstable and can change in different ways. It also means that they are creating new proteins--ones that were never intended or tested. The Roundup Ready soybeans used in the Russian test may therefore be quite different from the Roundup Ready soybeans used in follow-up studies.
Unstable genes make accurate safety testing impossible. It also may explain some of the many problems reported about GM foods. For example, nearly 25 farmers in the US and Canada say that certain GM corn varieties caused their pigs to become sterile, have false pregnancies, or give birth to bags of water. A farmer in Germany claims that a certain variety of GM corn killed 12 of his cows and caused others to fall sick. And Filipinos living next to a GM cornfield developed skin, respiratory, and intestinal symptoms and fever, while the corn was pollinating. The mysterious symptoms returned the following year, also during pollination, and blood tests on 39 of the Filipinos showed an immune response to the Bt toxin--created by the GM corn.
These problems may be due to particular GM varieties, or they may result from a GM crop that has "gone bad" due to genetic rearrangements. Even GM plants with identical gene sequences, however, might act differently. The amount of Bt toxin in the Philippine corn study described above, for example, varied considerably from kernel to kernel, even in the same plant.
Can we all say it together?: BETTER SAFE THAN SORRY.
The FDA does not require long-term safety studies of GM foods. Most Americans consume them daily.
*
OTHER FOOD NEWS:
If you're in Sonoma County, California, you can fight back against GM crops next Tuesday. Vote Yes on Measure M, which would place a 10-year moratorium on GM crops in Sonoma County.
It looks like it will be at least 2008 before we get mandatory labelling to identify the origin of our grocery store meat. Meatpackers and grocery chains oppose labelling, claiming that record-keeping is too difficult.
And-- I'm sorry-- this isn't food news; but it may please you to know that male mice sing to their lady loves when wooing them. I'll take good news wherever I can get it.
May you have a joyful song in your heart today as well. Eat hearty!