Roundup Tolerant GM Maize Linked To Tumor Development 356
New submitter spirito writes with this snippet about rats fed Roundup laced water: "The first animal feeding trial studying the lifetime effects of exposure to Roundup tolerant GM maize, and Roundup, the world's best-selling weedkiller, shows that levels currently considered safe can cause tumors and multiple organ damage and lead to premature death in laboratory rats, according to research published online today by the scientific journal Food and Chemical Toxicology. ... Three groups were given Roundup in their drinking water, at three different levels consistent with exposure through the food chain from crops sprayed with the weedkiller: the mid level corresponded to the maximum level permitted in the US in some GM feed; the lowest corresponded to contamination found in some tap waters. Three groups were fed diets which contained different proportions of NK603 – 11%, 22% and 33%. Three groups were given both Roundup and NK603 at the same three dosages. The final control group was fed an equivalent diet with no Roundup or NK603 but containing 33% of equivalent non-GM maize."
The Chicago Tribune reports that not everyone's convinced of the results: "Experts not involved in the study were highly skeptical about its methods and findings, with some accusing the French scientists of going on a 'statistical fishing trip.'"
Re:Did they study the health effects of starving? (Score:5, Interesting)
The end is near! (Really) (Score:5, Interesting)
He says that this is guaranteed to produce Roundup impervious weeds. At some point these super weeds will need very toxic chemicals to kill. The real problem is that vast areas of monoculture are unsustainable.
Nature abhors a vacuum and will fill it up with what can tolerate the environment.
Re:Did they study the health effects of starving? (Score:5, Interesting)
I always enjoyed the sight of people coming out of the Union Square Whole Foods in NYC with organic groceries. Because the smog, heavy metals, and road traffic exhaust of Manhattan won't give you cancer, but that trace amount of pesticide sure will.
To be fair, they do have above-average produce.
Re:Awful headline. (Score:1, Interesting)
Have you priced roundup? We most certainly do not bathe the plants in roundup; we wick them at the right time to use as little roundup as possible. However, you're very proud of your ignorance, so replying is a waste of your time. If that second statement is indeed false, I strongly suggest you read about the pesticides organic farmers are using. They're a lot worse for you and the environment than what professional farmers are using.
Re:Did they study the health effects of starving? (Score:5, Interesting)
The article states that "Up to 50% of males and 70% of females died prematurely" showing "2-3 times more large tumors than the control group"
FT (other) A:
Tom Sanders, head of the nutritional sciences research division at King's College London noted that Seralini's team had not provided any data on how much the rats were given to eat, or what their growth rates were. "This strain of rat is very prone to mammary tumors particularly when food intake is not restricted," he said in an emailed comment. "The statistical methods are unconventional and probabilities are not adjusted for multiple comparisons. There is no clearly defined data analysis plan and it would appear the authors have gone on a statistical fishing trip."
Re:Awful headline. (Score:4, Interesting)
In other news, Monsanto has patented cancer.
Funny, but while I agree there's a lot of evil at Monsanto, there's the problem that in many cases Roundup is LESS toxic than the alternatives if you want to get the crop yeild per acre/dollar that you can with Roundup & Roundup ready crops. It's sad, but we have limited amounts of fields and only so many resources(in dollar equivalents).
Theoretically speaking, we could feed pretty much everybody on the planet with 10% of the current planted crop areas if we switched to high density greenhouse hydroponics/aquaculture. We also wouldn't need anywhere near as much fresh water from the environment, but it would come at horrendous cost.
We could shift to non-greenhouse organic or non-roundup, but then we'd need more acres under cultivation, and it'd ultimately cost more for food. People have already rioted over food prices around the world. Actually heard on the news that they've spotted the price point at which 'global unrest' occurs. Didn't say what that price point is, but said they figured it out.
Food is serious business; we can only attempt to make food as safe as possible while still producing enough.
Re:Did they study the health effects of starving? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm the first to admit that I'm no expert on this stuff, but this sounds pretty damning...
Tom Sanders, head of the nutritional sciences research division at King's College London noted that Seralini's team had not provided any data on how much the rats were given to eat, or what their growth rates were.
"This strain of rat is very prone to mammary tumors particularly when food intake is not restricted," he said in an emailed comment.
"The statistical methods are unconventional and probabilities are not adjusted for multiple comparisons. There is no clearly defined data analysis plan and it would appear the authors have gone on a statistical fishing trip."
Mark Tester, a research professor at the Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics at the University of Adelaide, said the study's findings raised the question of why no previous studies have flagged up similar concerns.
"If the effects are as big as purported, and if the work really is relevant to humans, why aren't the North Americans dropping like flies? GM has been in the food chain for over a decade over there - and longevity continues to increase inexorably," he said in an emailed comment.
Re:Did they study the health effects of starving? (Score:2, Interesting)
And the numbers he's suggesting aren't if organics were grown via methods from 100 years ago, they are if we actually industrialized Organic farming (which we are in fact doing) The point is that modern farming techniques with GM crops and modern pesticides produce 5 to 10x the yield of Organic crops. If we were to switch to all organic, that would mean we'd have to use 5x the land, 5x the fertilizers, 5x the gas, 5x the manpower to produce the same amount of food we do today. Forcing Organic farming would kill BILLIONS of people. No joke at all. Even if GM crops do increase your risk of cancer over 50 years... starving increases your risk of death rather immediately.
Re:Dangerous poison. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Awful headline. (Score:4, Interesting)
I am blowing off a couple of mod points to answer this, but parent post's spin doctoring needs to be addressed.
RTFA, and you will find that the study showed a similar increase in diseases in the experimental groups that received only GM corn (no Roundup), only Roundup, and both GM corn and Roundup. With no statistical difference between the lowest dose groups and the highest dose groups. This, according to the study, suggests that both Roundup and the genetic manipulation that provides corn with protection against Roundup both interfere in the same way with some critical biochemical pathway at levels at least 100 times lower than those that are currently considered safe by the USDA, etc. The interference is described as a "threshhold effect", meaning that the presence of something in the GM manipulated corn and also in Roundup switch a pathway completely from one thing to another. This could happen, for instance, if the pathway was in the epigenetic mechanisms that turn sets of genes on and off. Some product of partial metabolism of Roundup and of the genetics that provide Roundup immunity might be throwing switches the wrong way.
One would hope that follow-up studies would explore whether the problem occurs at a specific phase of gestation or growth. Perhaps after a certain age there are no ill effects at all (the experiment was designed for whole life exposures, nothing more granular than that).
There is the possibility that the experimental design was flawed, or that some lowly lab tech was hired by agents of Treehuggers Anonymous to sabotage the work. Those possibilities appear to be vanishingly small, considering the reputations of the agencies behind the study.
There is however a relatively high probability that agents of the Monsanto Industrialized Food Complex will attempt to introduce FUD into any Slashdot discussion of the subject. Actually, irrespective of the intelligence and naievity levels of author of parent post, the probability of MIFC agents becoming active on ths Slashdot discussion approaches 1.00.
Re:Did they study the health effects of starving? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Awful headline. (Score:5, Interesting)
It's only a matter of time until the resources required to create meat get stressed to the point of pricing it out of most peoples diet. The fact that the developing world, especially China, is increasing the amount of meat in its diet will only increase the problem and quicken the change.
The American Fast Food Industrial Complex that has led the way in shaping the American diet and it's addiction to Beef will have to re-shape the American diet towards vegetarianism.
Re:Dangerous poison. (Score:4, Interesting)
"it would be a huge shock to discover oxygen causes cancer in people"
Er... oxygen causes cancer in people. It's why antioxidants are popular:
Oxidative Stress [wikipedia.org]