Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Monsanto Company Message Board

  • tblakeslee tblakeslee Sep 15, 2013 11:17 AM Flag

    Dr. Mercola article on Bt corn

    "Bt crops have the Bt-toxin gene built-in, so the toxin cannot be washed off. You simply cannot avoid consuming it. Furthermore, the plant-produced version of the poison is thousands of times more concentrated than the spray. If Bt genes are indeed capable of transferring horizontally to the bacteria colonizing the human digestive tract, scientists believe it could reasonably result in:

    Gastrointestinal problems
    Autoimmune diseases
    Food allergies
    Childhood learning disorders
    Already, there's plenty of other evidence showing that the Bt toxin produced in GM corn (and cotton plants) is toxic to humans and mammals and triggers immune system responses. For example, in government-sponsored research in Italy, mice fed Monsanto's Bt corn showed a wide range of immune responses, such as:9

    Elevated IgE and IgG antibodies, which are typically associated with allergies and infections
    An increase in cytokines, which are associated with allergic and inflammatory responses. The specific cytokines (interleukins) that were found to be elevated are also higher in humans who suffer from a wide range of disorders, from arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease to MS and cancer
    Elevated T cells (gamma delta), which are increased in people with asthma, and in children with food allergies, juvenile arthritis and connective tissue diseases
    Rats fed another of Monsanto's Bt corn varieties called MON 863, also experienced an activation of their immune systems, showing higher numbers of basophils, lymphocytes and white blood cells.10 These can indicate possible allergies, infections, toxins, and various disease states including cancer. There were also signs of liver and kidney toxicity."
    Another wonderful product from Monsanto!

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Mercola is a total lunatic. He features heavily as an utter quack on quackwatch, and other net.kook monitoring sites. Anything Mercola says is 100% wrong.

      • 1 Reply to the.heretic10
      • I was amazed at some of his articles...his only hope must be most followers do no independent checking of what he says.

        But my amazement went through the roof when I read comments under his articles. He has many hard core supporters..many of them.

        I see his name on a building next to the toll road near Schuamburg IL...while food health may be his speciality, allowing workers and clients to breath deep the exhaust from 100 K cars per day going by is apparently not a concern :)

        I didn't know there was a quackwatch .. I'll check it out.

        Holy cow....the good doctor does well doesn't he.....they have a picture of his mansion in Barrington. And the FDA has ordered him to stop making false claims. Maybe the next time the comet comes by earth he will hop a ride on the the spaceship hiding behind it.

    • scott2536@sbcglobal.net scott2536 Sep 16, 2013 11:39 AM Flag

      "" scientists believe it could reasonably result in: ""

      What scientists ? What are their credentials ? Give us a few names ,or are you just making this stuff up ?

    • OK...found a green peace study on Bt in GMO corn "In the growing season 2006, Greenpeace took leaf samples of commercially cultivated MON810
      maize plants in Germany and Spain to determine the Bt toxin (Cry1Ab) concentration. A total of
      619 samples from 12 fields were analysed using ELISA tests.
      MON810 maize is genetically engineered to produce a modified insecticide (Cry1Ab) that naturally
      occurs in the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). The production of this toxin is supposed to
      protect the maize plants from European corn borer larvae (ECB, Ostrinia nubilalis).
      This Greenpeace study shows a surprising pattern of plants that contained only very low Bt toxin
      levels. However, high levels could be observed in some plants. The variation found on the same
      field on the same day was considerable, and could differ by a factor of as much as 100. This is in
      agreement with the results of a new study published in April 20071 that concludes that “the
      monitoring of Cry1Ab expression [of MON810 plants] showed that the Cry1Ab concentrations
      varied strongly between different plant individuals.”
      In total, the Bt concentrations were much lower than those available from Monsanto for cultivation
      approval in the US and the EU, with a arithmetic mean of 9.35 ?g Bt/ g fresh weight (fw; standard
      deviation 1.03; range 7.93-10.34 ?g Bt/g fw). Here, our data also corroborate the results of
      Nguyen & Jehle (2007), who also found lower Bt concentrations (with means between 2.4 and 6.4
      ug Bt/g fw) than those known from the literature. The data recorded by Greenpeace, however,
      deviate even more from the data published so far. The means ranged from 0.5 to 2.2 ?g Bt/g fw,
      while Bt concentrations ranged from a minimum of no or 0.1 ig Bt/g fw to concentrations of about
      14.8 ug Bt/g fw."
      so if it is thousands of times more concentrated that the spray....that means the spray is something like 1 part per trillion Bt (the ug/gram is equivalent to a part per billion? sound right ?

    • I could not find Bt concentrations in either spray insecticides, or GMO foods. Tried quite a few different search phrases. What did you find ? I would have guessed sprays to be in the sub 1 % level, so the thousands of times stronger peaked my curiousity. I did find some instructions on labels, that said 1-2 tea spoons per gallon of Bt. just guessing, 6 gms per teaspoon, 50 % concentration...that would be about .0001 strength...so a thousand times that means corn is pure Bt ?

      Anyone know how much

      the more I look at his articles, the more I wonder why he doesn't post sources....I did find one reference "

      A report given to MomsAcrossAmerica4 by an employee of De Dell Seed Company (Canada's only non-GMO corn seed company) offers a stunning picture of the nutritional differences between genetically engineered (GE) and non-GE corn. Clearly, the former is NOT equivalent to the latter, which is the very premise by which genetically engineered crops were approved in the first place.

      Here’s a small sampling of the nutritional differences found in this 2012 nutritional analysis:

      •Calcium: GMO corn = 14 ppm / Non-GMO corn = 6,130 ppm (437 times more)
      •Magnesium: GMO corn = 2 ppm / Non-GMO corn = 113 ppm (56 times more)
      •Manganese: GMO corn = 2 ppm / Non-GMO corn = 14 ppm (7 times more)
      GMO corn was also found to contain 13 ppm of glyphosate, compared to zero in non-GMO corn. This is quite significant and well worth remembering."

      for such an easy test (elemental analysis, few hundred bucks)....I would wonder why others haven't picked up on this....besides the MomsAgainst I mean.

      • 3 Replies to stumbleoften
      • It does not matter. The Bt protein is digested by humans. It is a protein. Animals outside the targets do not have the receptors or the organ morphology for it to have any effect. Mercola has no idea what he is talking about. He makes money off of promoting fear. That's all this is.

      • stumble, it's pretty clear that the claim of a study showing such nutritional differences is actually a comparison of the analyses of soil samples in two cornfields.

        You are getting this study through some really stupid people. Look at the third line in their table.

        % organic matter - in GMO corn 1.2% - in non-GMO corn 2.1%

        Can you take seriously the idea that either kind of corn would be only 1 or 2 % organic matter?

      • Wow....I just found the MomsAgainst statement is being peddled around the web as " 2012 Nutritional Analysis: Comparison of GMO Corn versus Non-GMO Corn" So, a conversation from someone representing themselves (10 2012) as a employee of an organic seed company...is being posted on numberous anti gmo websites as a "study". 200 buck elemental analysis could answer the question...but why bother ?

        " 2012 Nutritional Analysis: Comparison of GMO Corn versus Non-GMO Corn" google it, let us know if you think this is transparent science...or just bar talk :)_

    • He is an outspoken person for his beliefs. Many other qualitifed people do not agree. A bit overboard I think but always good to see unspun information

      One would sure think after trillions of exposures there would be some epi results showing these impacts.

      Perhaps the cheeseburger guy could put some special personal spin on this....cheeseguy, what do you say ?

    • Tb, this is common sense to most people. unfortunately, most posters here are already suffering the effects of GMO in the frontal lobe

      • 1 Reply to cheezesqueezerjoon
      • ,what part of that advanced biochemical "what if" discussion did you think was "ccommon sense". I personally think 99 % of folks who read it wouldn't understand it enough know if it was true, an opinion, or false (including me, and most certainly way the over your head)

        And your opinion is those that don't agree whole heartledly are under some effects of GMO seeds... that sounds kind of weird ?

        The guy put up a good post....don't dilute it with your insults.

 
MON
116.70-2.23(-1.88%)Apr 17 4:02 PMEDT