|Additions||Females That Gave Birth||Born Rats (No.)||Dead Rats (No. / %) (in 3 weeks)|
|Control||4 (of 6)||44||3 / 6.8%|
|With GM Soy||4 (of 6)||45||25 / 55.6%|
|With Normal Soy||3 (of 3)||33||3 / 9%|
Over half (55.6%) of the rats fed GM soy were dead in 3 weeks, compared to 9% fed regular soy. Many that survived were malformed, as depicted in the photo. The smaller rat on the right was fed GM soy. The rat on the left was not. The rats are the same age.
"The morphology and biochemical structures of rats are very similar to those of humans, and this makes the results we obtained very disturbing."
- Dr. Ermakova
And remember this explanation by Jeffrey Smith of the difference between genetic modification and regular hybridization or selective breeding:
"Genetic engineering is not natural. It carries unique risks and is fraught with unpredicted side effects.
In normal hybridization or selective breeding you take plants from the same species or related species and they essentially have sex and their offspring share genes from both parents.
With genetic engineering, you take a single gene or combination of genes from other species, and you manipulate the gene in the laboratory. You add, typically, an "on switch" called a Promoter from a virus and other materials and then you force it into the DNA of the plant. Then you clone the cell into a plant.
The process of insertion, whether through "gene gun" technology or bacterial infection, plus cloning, causes massive collateral damage in the DNA. It leads to hundreds or thousands of mutations up and down the DNA, and hundreds or thousands of genes that can change their levels of expression in the natural plant. These changes can lead to unpredicted side effects, such as new or higher levels of toxins, carcinogens, allergens, or anti-nutrients. And this is not theoretical. They have actually found these types of things in the genetically engineered crops already on the market.
Well, more than 80 farmers and organizations just sent a letter (pdf) to the FDA and USDA expressing concerns about the US position on labeling of genetically engineered (GE) products. The FDA and USDA don't support labeling.
There's an important meeting on May 3 in Canada. A group that develops food safety standards for the United Nations, the Codex Alimentarius, is set to discuss the GE labeling issue. The FDA and USDA will be arguing that labeling food as genetically engineered "is likely to create the impression that the labeled food is in some way different" and would therefore be "false, misleading or deceptive."
If the US is successful in convincing the international body that GE labeling is false and misleading, then voluntary labeling of food inside the US, for instance, what the Non-GMO Project is doing, could be outlawed.
The US position paper states that Codex should not "suggest or imply that GM/GE foods are in any way different from other foods." However, [Dr. Michael Hansen, senior scientist at Consumers Union] stated, "Such foods clearly are different."What happened to President Obama's promise to make sure genetically engineered food was labeled?
- Consumers Union, More Than 80 Groups Urge FDA And USDA To Change US Position On Food Labeling, Position Will Create Problems For American Producers To Label Products GM/GE-Free