Rats Fed Lifetime of GM Corn Grow Horrifying Tumors, new study.

NewVision · 20-09-2012 01:16PM

Shenshen wrote: »

"NK 603 has been modified to be tolerant to the broad spectrum herbicide Roundup and thus contains residues of this formulation."

Have you actually read it? Be honest now.
Roundup is a weedkiller you can buy in B&Q.

" NK 603 has been modified to be tolerant to the broad spectrum herbicide Roundup and thus contains residues of this formulation. MON 810 and MON 863 are engineered to synthesize two different Bt toxins used as insecticides."

So the poisons are all in Monsanto's maize. It wasn't added by the scientists of the study as some here are implying. A maize which can also end up in your meal. Bon appetit!

1ZRed · 20-09-2012 01:17PM

People are always up in arms about GMO food/crops but they always seem to forget about things like manufactured human insulin which is a GM product! Not to mention vaccines, certain antibiotics and many drugs are just the same thing.

Just because it's food doesn't change anything. All of these products are going to end up in your blood stream anyway where you can't see the difference between food and other substances at a molecular level.

Ziphius · 20-09-2012 01:24PM

NewVision wrote: »

So the poisons are all in Monsanto's maize. It wasn't added by the scientists of the study as some here are implying. A maize which can also end up in your meal. Bon appetit!

Yes they were. It's in the abstract of the Seralini et al (2012) paper. In the first line.

"The health effects of a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize (from 11% in the diet), cultivated with or without Roundup, and Roundup alone (from 0.1 ppb in water), were studied 2 years in rats"

Roundup alone. You obviously haven't eeven read the paper. And then have the temerity to accuse another poster of lying.

NewVision · 20-09-2012 01:28PM

Ziphius wrote: »

Yes they were. It's in the abstract of the Seralini et al (2012) paper. In the first line.

"The health effects of a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize (from 11% in the diet), cultivated with or without Roundup, and Roundup alone (from 0.1 ppb in water), were studied 2 years in rats"

Roundup alone. You obviously haven't eeven read the paper. And then have the temerity to accuse another poster of lying.

As another control group. So what?

NewVision · 20-09-2012 01:32PM

1ZRed wrote: »

People are always up in arms about GMO food/crops but they always seem to forget about things like manufactured human insulin which is a GM product! Not to mention vaccines, certain antibiotics and many drugs are just the same thing.

Just because it's food doesn't change anything. All of these products are going to end up in your blood stream anyway where you can't see the difference between food and other substances at a molecular level.

Pharmaceuticals are being tested for years - first with animals, finally with humans - before they enter the market. The GMO industry has been testing their crops with animals for no longer than 90 days. Now we know why!

That alone is a scandal itself.

Shenshen · 20-09-2012 01:42PM

NewVision wrote: »

Are you just stupid or are you intentionally lying here?

Please READ:

"Furthermore, groups of animals were also fed with diets containing one of six other normal (non-GM) reference maize lines"

They were fed non-GM maize lines.
They were NOT fed GM maize which had not been treated with the weed killer.

I suspect you have to be trolling.

Ziphius · 20-09-2012 01:43PM

NewVision wrote: »

As another control group. So what?

No, it was a treatment group.

BASHIR · 20-09-2012 01:56PM

YFlyer wrote: »

It's meant to kill rats?

I doubt that's what it is intended for, but surely it wasn't intended on been ingested by them either.

1ZRed · 20-09-2012 01:58PM

NewVision wrote: »

Pharmaceuticals are being tested for years - first with animals, finally with humans - before they enter the market. The GMO industry has been testing their crops with animals for no longer than 90 days. Now we know why!

That alone is a scandal itself.

The testing has been longer than that. And besides, GM crops are to be brought in in order to give better yields and do away with as many chemicals found in pesticides, fungicides etc. When artificial fertizers were first used in agriculture do you think they were tested extremely thoroughly? Absolutely not. They were just altered whenever a problem was discovered as they went along.
GMO crops are being tested the whole time because there is a huge amount of research needed in order to create them. So before they are even put into the environment they have already gone through rigorous reasearch and testing. They don't take what they do lightly.

So, with artificial chemicals and fertilisers already known to be harmful for human health and that of the environment, why should we continue to use them over GM crops? The controversy surrounding GMOs is just fear mongering caused by a huge lack of knowledge behind the processes that make them. In theory, GMOs are more natural and healthier to us than anything currently being mass produced. Why? Because all you do with genetically modified organisms is change the DNA building blocks inorder to give it a beneficial advantage that will help us.
Be that a resistance to disease without the need for harmful chemicals in order to give a better yield to farmers (which in turn lowers food costs for us)or another advantage. All they are doing is changing the building blocks of the plant to give it an advantage, then nature takes over to build the product. It's all natural.

If you think it's so scandalous, have you any understanding of basic genetics or any substantial scientifically credible eveidence to link GMOs to being harmful, and then also explain why they are harmful? If not, it's very ignorant to be so against them if you don't understand the process behind them.

General General · 20-09-2012 02:04PM

Look, corn always had dangerous side effects... ask the Jolly Green Giant.

mikom · 20-09-2012 02:15PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBYjZTdrJlA

YFlyer · 20-09-2012 02:18PM

BASHIR wrote: »

I doubt that's what it is intended for, but surely it wasn't intended on been ingested by them either.

And for humans?

bbam · 20-09-2012 02:23PM

Boombastic wrote: »

There have been a rise in the prevalence of many diseases over the decades, who's to say it's not the crap in the food? Cancer?

Mainly because people live longer and medical investigation and technology can detect them.
Just because we didn't look for them or have the technology 60 years ago doesn't mean they weren't there

I've heard stories of people during from black death or black growth, they had cancer but nobody knew what it was

Ziphius · 20-09-2012 02:25PM

YFlyer wrote: »

Where in the paper does it say this?

Section 3.1 'Mortality'

"After mean survival time had elapsed, any deaths that occurred
were considered to be largely due to aging. Before this period,
30% control males (three in total) and 20% females (only two) died
spontaneously, while up to 50% males and 70% females died in
some groups on diets containing the GM maize".

This rat strain tends to develop mammary tumors anyway. Studies suggest 47% - 76% of females develop mammary tumors. Source.

The paper is a bit of a mess. Finding any real comparison between control and treatment groups is difficult.

Gmol · 20-09-2012 02:25PM

General General wrote: »

Look, corn always had dangerous side effects... ask the Jolly Green Giant.

And the children of the GM corn:eek:

TheChizler · 20-09-2012 02:26PM

The high number of test groups, and low number of test subjects and control groups makes me think of this comic.

Augmerson · 20-09-2012 02:27PM

Ravenid wrote: »

Being the devils advocate here the tests done were not anywhere close to accepted scientific standards.

The test pool was too small (Only 20 rats were tested).
The group who did the testing have refused to pass on their full testing results unless anyone who reads it signs a Non-Disclosure Agreement.
And worst of all the rats being used are known to develop the same Tumors naturally. World wide they are never used in any scientific test for this exact reason.

Run this test again with a normal test pool, with both the process and results open to everyone and using the standard testing procedures and I'd take it seriously.

Where did you read/hear that?

Ziphius · 20-09-2012 02:27PM

TheChizler wrote: »

The high number of test groups, and low number of test subjects and control groups makes me think of this comic.

Me too

neil_hosey · 20-09-2012 02:29PM

i dont know much about GM food, but the article clearly states they were fed herbicide roundup in small quantities aswell... roundup is a poison, a weed killer. When you spray it, you cant leave ur dog or cat near the area for a week or 2.

So what was the result showing? That roundup causes these tumors, which ive no doubt they would if not worse, or did GM Corn alone cause it??

EDIT: Wow im slow, was mentioned in the first page ...

YFlyer · 20-09-2012 02:40PM

Ziphius wrote: »

Section 3.1 'Mortality'

"After mean survival time had elapsed, any deaths that occurred
were considered to be largely due to aging. Before this period,
30% control males (three in total) and 20% females (only two) died
spontaneously, while up to 50% males and 70% females died in
some groups on diets containing the GM maize".

This rat strain tends to develop mammary tumors anyway. Studies suggest 47% - 76% of females develop mammary tumors. Source.

The paper is a bit of a mess. Finding any real comparison between control and treatment groups is difficult.

That is nearly two and over three times the rate for male and female rats respectively. I would classed that has highly significant.

YFlyer · 20-09-2012 02:45PM

neil_hosey wrote: »

i dont know much about GM food, but the article clearly states they were fed herbicide roundup in small quantities aswell...

Not all.

The varieties of maize used in this study were the R-tolerant NK603 (Monsanto Corp., USA), and its nearest isogenic non-transgenic control. These two types of maize were grown under similar normal conditions, in the same location, spaced at a sufficient distance to avoid cross-contamination. The genetic nature, as well as the purity of the GM seeds and harvested material, was confirmed by qPCR analysis of DNA samples. One field of NK603 was treated with R at 3 L ha−1 (WeatherMAX, 540 g/L of glyphosate, EPA Reg. 524-537), and another field of NK603 was not treated with R.

Ziphius · 20-09-2012 02:53PM

YFlyer wrote: »

That is nearly two and over three times the rate for male and female rats respectively. I would classed that has highly significant.

Really? Well let's do a Chi Square test.

Tumor No Tumor

Control: 5 15

Treatment: 12 8

can fill in here: http://graphpad.com/quickcalcs/contingency2/

I got a p value of 0.0536. Close but not significant.

Remember they've picked the worst cases to compare with the control. Some of them were actually healthier (see the original New Scientist article I linked).

BASHIR · 20-09-2012 02:57PM

YFlyer wrote: »

And for humans?

I see what your getting at. Dont drink roundup, thanks for the top tip!

Capt'n Midnight · 20-09-2012 03:33PM

Shenshen wrote: »

Roundup is a weedkiller you can buy in B&Q.

B&Q will sell you circular saws and Caustic soda

if you plan on killing yourself in strange and painful ways then B&Q will help you do it yourself

YFlyer · 20-09-2012 03:43PM

BASHIR wrote: »

I see what your getting at. Dont drink roundup, thanks for the top tip!

The varieties of maize used in this study were the R-tolerant NK603 (Monsanto Corp., USA), and its nearest isogenic non-transgenic control. These two types of maize were grown under similar normal conditions, in the same location, spaced at a sufficient distance to avoid cross-contamination. The genetic nature, as well as the purity of the GM seeds and harvested material, was confirmed by qPCR analysis of DNA samples. One field of NK603 was treated with R at 3 L ha−1 (WeatherMAX, 540 g/L of glyphosate, EPA Reg. 524-537), and another field of NK603 was not treated with R.

Capt'n Midnight · 20-09-2012 03:43PM

1ZRed wrote: »

People are always up in arms about GMO food/crops but they always seem to forget about things like manufactured human insulin which is a GM product! Not to mention vaccines, certain antibiotics and many drugs are just the same thing.

GM to produce human insulin \o/

1ZRed wrote: »

The testing has been longer than that. And besides, GM crops are to be brought in in order to give better yields and do away with as many chemicals found in pesticides, fungicides etc. When artificial fertizers were first used in agriculture do you think they were tested extremely thoroughly? Absolutely not. They were just altered whenever a problem was discovered as they went along.

the GMO in this case has been modified to resist herbicide so farmers can use more herbicide and hence monsato can sell more herbicide.

Artificial fertilizer generally consists of very simple inorganic molecules made from inorganic substances. Ammonium Nitrate, one of the main fertilizers, can be made from air and water, substances that are generally regarded as safe and kinda difficult to avoid. There is a lot of difference between using simple substance that already occur in nature and introducing foreign genes that can jump into other plants.

If weeds acquire herbicide resistance what then ?

If organic crops acquire GM genes who will compensate the growers ?

BASHIR · 20-09-2012 03:46PM

YFlyer wrote: »

The varieties of maize used in this study were the R-tolerant NK603 (Monsanto Corp., USA), and its nearest isogenic non-transgenic control. These two types of maize were grown under similar normal conditions, in the same location, spaced at a sufficient distance to avoid cross-contamination. The genetic nature, as well as the purity of the GM seeds and harvested material, was confirmed by qPCR analysis of DNA samples. One field of NK603 was treated with R at 3 L ha−1 (WeatherMAX, 540 g/L of glyphosate, EPA Reg. 524-537), and another field of NK603 was not treated with R.

Ok thanks.
Can they provide a figure for the traces of roundup found in the rats. Whats a trace?

YFlyer · 20-09-2012 04:29PM

BASHIR wrote: »

Ok thanks.
Can they provide a figure for the traces of roundup found in the rats. Whats a trace?

The paper mentions further studies will be carried out including glyphosate presence in rat tissues.

In conclusion, it was previously known that glyphosate consumption in water above authorized limits may provoke hepatic and kidney failures (EPA). The results of the study presented here clearly demonstrate that lower levels of complete agricultural glyphosate herbicide formulations, at concentrations well below officially set safety limits, induce severe hormone-dependent mammary, hepatic and kidney disturbances. Similarly, disruption of biosynthetic pathways that may result from overexpression of the EPSPS transgene in the GM NK603 maize can give rise to comparable pathologies that may be linked to abnormal or unbalanced phenolic acids metabolites, or related compounds. Other mutagenic and metabolic effects of the edible GMO cannot be excluded. This will be the subject of future studies, including transgene and glyphosate presence in rat tissues. Reproductive and multigenerational studies will also provide novel insights into these problems. This study represents the first detailed documentation of long-term deleterious effects arising from the consumption of a GM R-tolerant maize and of R, the most used herbicide worldwide.

Ziphius · 20-09-2012 04:43PM

YFlyer wrote: »

The varieties of maize used in this study were the R-tolerant NK603 (Monsanto Corp., USA), and its nearest isogenic non-transgenic control. These two types of maize were grown under similar normal conditions, in the same location, spaced at a sufficient distance to avoid cross-contamination. The genetic nature, as well as the purity of the GM seeds and harvested material, was confirmed by qPCR analysis of DNA samples. One field of NK603 was treated with R at 3 L ha−1 (WeatherMAX, 540 g/L of glyphosate, EPA Reg. 524-537), and another field of NK603 was not treated with R.

Three treatment groups were used.

1). GM maize only
2.) GM maize and Round up herbicide
3.) Round up herbicide only.

This is clearly mentioned in the abstract. You are spreading misinformation YFlyer.

Ziphius · 20-09-2012 04:48PM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

GM to produce human insulin \o/

the GMO in this case has been modified to resist herbicide so farmers can use more herbicide and hence monsato can sell more herbicide.

. If weeds acquire herbicide resistance what then ?

If organic crops acquire GM genes who will compensate the growers ?

Indeed. It's a savvy business decision IMHO. Regarding your questions these are policey issues that should be discussed. Personally, I think the responsibilty should lie mostly with the private firm (in this case Monsanto).

The problem is, hyperbolic scare stories in the media can turn people off basic scientific research into GMO. Such as that carried out in Teagasc and our universities.

Rats Fed Lifetime of GM Corn Grow Horrifying Tumors, new study.

Comments