APPROVED ONMAY22, 2013 BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY ... General.pdf · 2013-05-08  · APPROVED ONMAY22, 2013 BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AT THE WEEKLYBUSINESS SESSION General

APPROVED ON MAY 22, 2013

BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

AT THE WEEKLY BUSINESS SESSION

General Discussion: May 8, 20139:30 a. m.— BCC Conference Room

Commissioners Simon G. Hare, Cherryl Walker, and Keith Heck; Terri Wharton, Transcriber

Chair Simon Hare called the meeting to order at 9: 35 a. m.

Karen Austin, Jonathan Spero, and Hal Anthony, supporters of GMO- Free Josephine County discussedGenetic Roulette with the Board and distributed Exhibit A — Information on Genetically ModifiedStatistics. The Board thanked them for the education on the topic.

The Board discussed the following items:

Senate Bill 745 ( Healthy Forest): The Board shared their concerns with Senator Wyden' s interest in

imposing additional restrictions.

Setting a " jail cap" for meals: Commissioner Heck reported that after discussing the program withthe catering service, setting the meal cap at 100 versus the current 99 would have only saved theCounty$ 54.00.

SOREDI Jet Boat Ride: Commissioner Heck said he is attending.Airport Septic Tank: Commissioner Walker reported the septic system pump failed at the GrantsPass Airport and Larry Graves is working on it.

Meeting adjourned at 10:56 a.m.

exit-76/ rA5J4l134. _ Ercesa Cancers and Deaths with GM Feed: the Stats Staid Up On n

loKScul /'Hero Biotechnology New Science of the Organism BB Campaigns , Science and Society , Publications

w Big Issues j Art

t Institute ofi Science in Societyi.

EPIC r Toe 195 members area log in

Like 1. 3k Tweet 112 56printer friendly version

Views and goods adverthed

are not necessad y ISIS Report 16/ 10/ 12 HSiSisanot-for-profitendorsed by Science inSociety or the Inst. of organisation,Science in Society. Excess Cancers and Deaths with GM Feed: the Stats

d ngon

AdC hoices

Stand Upmembership fees,Subscriptions, and

Prostate merchandise sales toCancer That cancers are found even with a small numberof rats tested is strong evidence that the GM feed and herbicide are

continue its work. Find

carcinogenic Prof Peter Saundersout more about

Treatment membership bras

c anccreenter.... Please circulate widely and report, but you must give the URL of the original and preserve all the links back toRecent Publications

Learn about articles on our website. If you find this report useful, please support ISIS by subscribing to our magazine Science in

leading-edgeSociety, and encourage your friends to do so. Or have a look at the ISIS bookstore for other publications

uNg

treatments for by University published findingsRainbow 1420

In September zoom the research team led Gilles-Eric Sdralini at the Unlve of Caen ublished the findkr of their wear is theProstate Cancer feeding trial on rats to test for toxicity of Monsanto's genetically modified( GM) maize NK6o3 and/or Roundup means,diagnosis today herbicide in the online edition of Food and Chemical Toxicology[ 1], medium and message

of life, the rainbow

within that mirrorsSdralini and his colleagues had previously found evidence for toxicity of GM feed in data from Monsanto' s own the one in the skyexperiments, which they had obtained through a Freedom of information demand[ z]. Monsanto challenged their Order Now I more

conclusions and, to no one' s great surprise the European Food Standards Agency( EFSA) supported Monsanto[ 3]. Sothe team decided to run their own experiment, using an unusually large number of animals and over a period of about ® Celebratingtwo years, roughly the life expectancy of the rats, rather than the usual 90 days required in toxicity trials including Isis-Monsanto' s. Quantum Jae

Biology- loo pagebook featuring essays

What Sdralini and his colleagues found was that NK6o3 and Roundup are not only both toxic as expected, but also and selected artworkcarcinogenic, which was unexpected. The proportion of treated rats that died during the experiments was much from the 2011 ISISgreater than the controls; moreover, in almost all groups a higher proportion developed tumours, and the tumours event of the same

appeared earlier. name

Order Now I Preview

As soon as the paper appeared, the GM lobby swung into action. In particular, the Science Media Centre( SMC), aLondon-based organisation partly funded by industry, quickly obtained quotes from a number of pro-GM scientists and

Green

distributed them to the media[ 4]. According to a report in Times Higher Education[ 5], the SMC succeeded ini

1ooX

influencing the coverage of the story in the UK press and largely kept it off the television news. Renewable by zocoA must-read for

Sdralini has rebutted the pro-GM critics point by point on the CRIIGEN website[ 6]. The statistician Paul Deheuvels, a saving the climate"professor at the Universitd Pierre at Marie Curie in Paris and a member of the French Academic des sciences, has now

Order Now) More info

drawn attention to another serious error in the criticisms[ 7]: the complaint that Sdralini used only io rats per groupwhen the OECD guidelines 8 recommend o for investigations on carcino enesis. Because the experiments did not

The Rainbow

g [ ] 5 3 pe and thefollow the accepted protocol, their results, they argue, can be safely ignored. Worm. The

Physics of OruinismfIn the first place, this was not a wilful disregard of the guidelines. The experiment was designed to test for toxicity, and " Probably the Mostfor that the recommended group size is 10.

Important Book for

the Coming Scientific

But Deheuvels pointed out that the fact Sdralini and his colleagues had used smaller groups than recommended makesRevolu " Now m

its Thirtiond Editionthe results if anything more convincing, not less. That is because using a smaller number of rats actually made it less guy Now I More infolikely to observe any effect. The fact that an effect was observed despite the small number of animals made the resultall the more serious. rdio1! 1 radlcnisdenee

magazine on

To see why, we have to look carefully at how common statistical tests are carried out. We begin with a null hypothesis, f ' earth

which as the name suggests is essentially the hypothesis that nothing unusual has happened. Here it is the hypothesiso

errs in et 57

that rats fed on GMOs and/or herbicide are no more likely to develop cancer than the controls. Clearly, we would like toour Prow' outer your

copy from ournoline

reject the null hypothesis If it is false and accept it If It is true. But statistics is about taking decisions in the face of store,uncertainty—if there were no uncertainty there would be no need to use statistics—and so however careful we are,we may come to the wrong conclusion. i

There are two ways in which we can go wrong. On the one hand, we can make a" Type t error" in rejecting the null A

hypothesis when it is correct. Here that would mean reporting that GMO and/or herbicide are carcinogenic when theyare not. Or, we can make a" Type 2 error" in accepting the null hypothesis when it is false. Here that would mean dssier containing

comprehensive

dossier conin

reporting that GMO and/or herbicide are not carcinogenic when in fact they are. more than 160 fullyreferenced articles

Naturally we would like to design experiments to make either of those probabilities as small as possible, but there is a from the Science inproblem. The two types of error are linked. We can reduce the probability of making a Type 1 error by requiring Society archives.

NOW UPDATED

www.i- sis.org.tkEtcess cancers and deaths from GM feed stets stand up.php 1/ 3

5I4/1"s - . Etcess Cancers and Deaths with GM Feed: the State Stand Up

Adehoicea la stronger evidence before we reject the null hypothesis. But If we do that we necessarily require less evidence tonw' Nowt More aria

accept it, but that increases the probability of making a Type 2 error. We have to find a balance, and usually what we do "' = ono Free:

Prostate Cancer is insist that the probability of a Type 1 error must be very small, conventionally 0.05. That' s the origin of the" significant ¢ r- Exposing theStages

at 5 percent" level.0 „ m, Blotechnologyto

see the Progression A probability of 0. 05 is very small, so what we are saying is that we will only accept that the effect is real if we can be Ensure the Integrity ofof Stages for

convinced" be and reasonable doubt"• and most of the time that makes sense. If you' re thinkin of installin a new our Food supplyProstate Cancer. Get

beyond doubt"; y thinking g Buy Now( More infoFlpert Info manufacturing process or a new way of running your farm, you want to be very confident that it really is better before

Food Futuresyou make a major investment.

Now

5 Signs You' ll Get It is not so obviously sensible when safety is concerned. If there is scientific evidence that a product is hazardous, then ``•-- ," s InabieCancer it is hardly surprising if the manufacturer would not want to withdraw it unless the evidence is very strong indeed. The • Fossil Fuel Free

rest of us, however, might take a different view. Are we really willing to accept NK6o3 maize, or Roundup herbicide, Buy Now I More infoThese 5 Signs Wain unless and until they have been shown beyond reasonable doubt to be carcinogenic?You That Cancer Is

Starting Inside Your The standard statistical test does seem to be the wrong way around, but that's partly because so far we have only beenBody. considering the Type 1 error, the false positive. But as Deheuvels reminds us, there is also the Type 2 error, the false

Join the I sIS mailing

negative. If NK6o3 and/or the herbicide are actually carcinogenic, what is the probability that we will fail to observelift enter email

ideFffects fro} that?Roundup?

beThe way to reduce the probability of a Type 2 error is to use larger groups. Because we would expect cardnogenidty to

subscri

Diagnosed with be slower to appear and harder to detect than toxicity, the group size for experiments on carcinogenicity should beParkinson's? Get

brier than for toxicity, and this is precisely what the OECD Guidelines require.Free Case Review&

Legal Helpiif the experiment had not detected carcinogenicity, that might have been because the groups were too small. As theexperiment did detect It, that the groups were small is not an issue. The scientists who were asked to supply sound

Prostate Cancer bites for the Science Media Centre were quick to object that SEralini and his group had used the protocol for testingTreatment

toxicity rather than the one for carcinogenesis. Had they taken a moment to ask themselves why the two protocols aredifferent, they would have realised that in using the toxicity protocol( and remember, that was because it was what the

New Prostate Cancer experiment was designed to test) Sdralnl and his group made It less likely that they would detect carcinogenesis. ToTreatment Largest

criticise a result because the experiment was conducted in a way that was more conservative than required is totallyPrivate Hospital inMexico unjustifiable.

References

1. S6ralini G-E, Mesnage R, Gress 5, Defarge N, Malatesta M, Hennequin D and de Vend8mois JS( zolz), Longterm toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. Food and ChemicalToxicity. http:l/dx. doi.ors/io.1o161j.fct.2o1z. 08.00e,

2. Seralini G- E, Celiier D and de Vendbmois JS( 2007). New analysis of a rat feeding study with a geneticallymodified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicity 52,596- 602.

3. EFSA review of statistical analyses conducted for the assessment of the MON863 90-day rate feeding study,2007, http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajpumal/ doc/ 19r.pdf

4. Science Media Centre press release: Expert Reaction to GM maize causing tumours In rats. 19 September 2012,http:Ilwwwsciencemediacentre.org/pagesjpress releasesh2-oq-iq_gm_mai?.._ rats tumnvrs.htm

5. " Shock troops check' poor' GM study", Paul Jump, Times Higher Education, 4 October 2012.6. Criigen Research Team FAQs, accessed 12 October 2012, http://www.criigen.org/SiteEn/ index. php?

Qption= cnm_content&task=view&id=368& Itemid= 1

7. De H euveis P. Etude de SEralini sur les OGM: pourquol sa mdthodologfe est statistlquement bonne. Le nouvelobserveteur Le Plus, 2012, accessed 12 October 2012, http:/tleplus.nouvelobs.comlcontribution/6464c8-etudede-seralini-sur-les-opnrpourquoi-sa-methodologie-est-statistiquement-bonne.htmi,

utm_source=outbran&utrrtmedium=widget&utm. campaign=obciick&obref=obinsource

8. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals 451: Carcinogenicity Studies, 2009.http:/Iwww.oe cd-ilibrary.orgldocserver/downioad/fulltexti97aslole.pdf?expire s= 1350053297& id= id& accname=frees ontent&check5um=8B6C78EA268AD83DB8878oaFF18E814T

There are 4 comments on this article so far.Add your comment

Tim Eisenbeis Comment left 22nd October 2012 10: 10: 16

Simply a superb explanation for those of us non-statisticians. Thank you! You' re to be commended for diligentlyworking to get the truth out before the people. If anyone is paying attention, they will benefit from listening toreason and careful scientific observation, blocking out the viciously selfish hype.

John Byng Comment left 16th November 2012 22: 10: 28Please correct the typo in the twelth paragraph beginning" It is not so obviously sensible...". The words at the end ofthe paragraph should be:-"... shown beyond reasonable doubt not to be carcinogenic?" Unfortunately the" not" is

missing. Otherwise a brilliant article.

Peter Saunders Comment left 19th November 2012 08:08:17John: Thanks for your comment, but I meant it as It stands. The Issue is whether we have to prove beyond

reasonable doubt that Roundup is carcinogenic before we are permitted to restrict or forbid Its use. It would ofcourse be better if it were up to Monsanto to prove that it is not carcinogenic, but that isn' t how these things are

www.i-els.org. tdE)cess cancers arxf deaths from GM feed slats stand up.plp 213

r

R

5/41t3_ . GM Cancer Warning Can No Longer Be IgnoredHone Biotechnology , New Science of the Organism ., IBS Canpalgts . Science and Society . Ribications , Big issues BB Art

ki,

institute of Science in Societylef: Y `. U1l, iR ,41.,, iii

XML I.•, • x.. x : t. ta .` ISIS members area login i —..___________,

MOMIMMINENT

Lute 860 S West 55 ST

printer friendly versionViews and goods advertized

are not necessarly ISIS Report 24/ 10/ 12 fsisisanot-for-endorsed by Science in not-for-profitSociety or the Inst. of organisation,

SciencenSooety. GM Cancer Warning Can No Longer Be Ignored

dependiinngon

Whereas lb membership fees,The latest findings of cancers and deaths from GM maize and Roundup herbicide are the result of the most in-depth

subscriptions, and

Is GMO Foodlong-term toxicology study ever done on GM food; we ignore them at our peril Prof Peter Saunders and Dr Mae-Wan

merchandise sales to

Safei p continue Its work. rind

ti•.:!! Scats\ if1.. . BD out more about

n1

membership hereGet The Facts About A fully referenced version of this report is posted on ISIS members website and is otherwise available for downloadGenetically

hereEngineered Foods. Recent Publications

Free MD Report.Please circulate widely and report, but you must give the URL of the original and preserve all the links back to

ill Livingarticles on our website. If you find this report useful, please support ISIS by subscribing to our magazine Science in Rainbow 14205 Signs You' ll Get Society, and encourage your friends to do so. Or have a look at the ISIS bookstore for other publications water is theCancer means,vu_uc a, rrnr.c, rrn

medium and messagew In the Vatican Museums in Rome stands a statue of Laocoon and his sons. Legend has It that LaocoSn tried to warn his of life, the rainbowThese 5 Signs Warn fellow citizens against taking in the wooden horse that the Greeks had left outside their gates. It was not a gift, but a within that minorsYou That Cancer is

ruSe designed to allow Greek soldiers to enter the city. The Greek gods, who wanted to see Troy destroyed, sent sea the one In the skyStarting Inside Yourserpents to kIN Laocotn. This convinced the Trojans that the horse was Indeed sacred; so they opened the gates and

Order Now l moreBody.B

dragged it into the city. The result was the total destruction of Troy and its empire.Celebrating

SideFlfecis m The biotech industry is doing its best to convince us that GMOs are the key to feeding a hungry world, when all theIsisfro

Roundup? quantum Jazzevidence is that they profit only the companies. Whenever anyone tries to warn of the dangers of GMOs, the industry Biology- too page

A"--` ourla" Y crresponds by doing its utmost to discredit the whistle blower and prevent the warning from being heard. We have book featuring essays

DiagnOsed withalready witnessed what happened to Arpad Pusztai([ 1] Pusztai Publishes Amidst Fresh Storm of Attack, ISIS News 3),

and selected artworkParidn

Case Review

GetDavid Quist and Ignacio Chapels[ z1 Who' s Afraid of Horizontal Gene Transfer?,5151 and Irina Ermakova

from the 2011 IsisFrye Case Review 8t Q g u J S) 3] Science event of the cameLegal Help! and Scientist Abug,SIS 36) to name but a few; also Nancy Olivlera([ 4] Big Business= Bad Science? ISIS News 9/ 1o) name

and David Healy([ 5] The Depressing Side of Medical Science, SIS 39) with the pharmaceutical industry no less corrupt Order Now 1 Preview

Bone Cancer than biotechnology.

iiWarning ensvn>ntonrlind. com.. GM maize and herbicide link to cancer" a bomb" lesKnow The Warning Renewable by zocoSigns Of Bone The latest warning- perhaps the most dramatic to-date– comes in a paper published online 19 September 2012 in the " A must-read forCancer. Read Ripert journal Food and Chemical Toxicology reporting high rates of death and cancers in rats fed Monsanto' s GM maize saving the climate"Advice Here Now

NK6o3 and/or Roundup herbicide compared with controls[ 6]. The study carried out by Gilles-Eric Sdralini and his groupOrder Now I More info

at the University of Caen involved the largest number of rats followed for their entire lifespan of two years. By allaccounts, it was the most in-de long-term toxicology study ever done on GM food 7. Seralini reported

The Rainbowt g Y dY ported the results and the

in the European Parliament. If7 worn, ThePhysics of Organisms

France' s former Environment minister Corinne Lepage MEP said the study was" a bomb" calling into question all Probably the Most

existing regulatory authorizations of GMOs. GMOs are approved in the European Union and elsewhere on the basis of a Important Book for

9o-day toxicology study at best, carried out by the biotech companies. The key finding of the new study is that tumoursthe

Revolucotlminongs

Now

iflc

wfn

and other serious health impacts appeared at 4-7 months, which would have been missed in all previous tests. its Third EditionBuy Now i More info

On the same day the study was published, the French government asked a health watchdog, The National Agency for ; The ordyHealth Safety to investigate the new findings[ 8]. The next day, Austria called for EU to review its approval process for 44111. radical sdenceGM food[ 9]. Within a week, Russia suspended import and use of GM corn from the USA[ io). On io October, the magazine on

company Vilmorin, the world' s fourth largest seed group and a holding of Limagrain dropped its planned GM field trials earthScience in Society 57in France[ ii]. OUT NOW! Order your

copy from curnolingThe response from the pro-GM lobby was equally dramatic and immediate. The UK industry-funded Science Media store.Centre( SMC) issued quotes from" experts"( with undisclosed conflict of interest) in an attempt to discredit the study.This was followed by a deluge of attacks and off the cuff and largely irrelevant criticisms from the scientificestablishment and official regulatory bodies around the world( see later).

A

The notorious European Food Safety Authority( EFSA), which authorized the GM maize, issued its initial review of thestudy– pending a detailed review- claiming, unsurprisingly, that there is no need to re-evaluate the safety because the

comprehensive

dossier containingntainingstudy Is of" insufficient scientific quality". Lepage expressed serious concerns about EFSA' s initial review, which did more than 16o fullynot read like carefully considered opinions but hastily put-together points circulated by the pro-GM lobby. She referenced articleshighlighted the conflict of interest in Andrew Chesson, one of the only two people appointed by EFSA to review the

from the Science In

study, who was on the panel that originally approved the GM maize NK6o3 and actually helped prepare the draftSociety archives.

NOW UPDATED

www.1- sis.org.uldGM_ cancer t rrring_ cen no longer be ignored.php 1/ 5

5/4/13 GM Cancer Warring Can No Longer Be IgnoredAdCiroiaes document recommending its approval. Thus, Chesson is acting as" both judge and jury"[ 7]. Chesson, it turns out, was

p'' NOW 1 More Into

also involved in discrediting his former colleague Arpad Pusztai; he chaired the audit committee that found fault with mi= x GMO Free:ClinicalPusztai's research. Exposing the

Cancer Hazards of

Trials EFSA has since been criticized by the European Court of Auditors for inadequate management of conflicts of interest Biotechnology to12]. This came as no surprise as conflicts of interests are rife within EFSA. Earlier in May 2012, the Chair of EFSA' s Ensure the integrity of

ur EC_.[ ss. ., our Food SupplyManagement Board was forced to quit because of her industry links. Just a month earlier, EFSA admitted to theBuy Now I more intoLearn more European ombudsman that it had not properly responded to the case of Suzy Renckens, the former head of EFSA' s GM

about innovative unit, who left EFSA and moved to a lobbying job with the biotech giant Syngenta. And GMO panel chair Harry Kuiperit"' Now

Futures

cancer clearly used his position to influence the work of the panel in a pro-industry direction. OrganicSustainabletreatment

of the Earth condemned EFSA for having consistently sided with the biotech industry and disregarded health or * Fossil Fuel Freeoptions

environmental concerns about GM crops. It called on national governments and EU safety authorities to immediately Bu' Now I More infoprovided by suspend all Roundup-tolerant GM crops from market, the European Commission to suspend all new GMO approvals and

CPCA. to start and root-and-branch reform of how the risks of GM foods are to be assessed, and for the EU to review the

safety of the herbicide Roundup( glyphosate), including the link between GM crops and the use of the herbicide.24,

Greenpeace too, called for immediate freeze on approvalsloin the 1.

yo mailingpprovals of new GM crops and a redesign of safety testing over the usC enter your emaillong term. They should both call for banning glyphosate as the damning evidence on glyphosate is even stronger than address_for GMOs, and the maximum permitted levels of glyphosate are set to rise by too-15o times in the European Union ifMonsanto has its way( see[ 13] Why Gyphosate Should Be Banned, ISIS Report). subscribe

The most thorough and long- term toxicology test to-date

The findings reported by Sdraiini' s group are not those of an isolated study suddenly to reveal that GM feed and themost widely used herbicide in the world may be toxic or carcinogenic. They are the latest of similar findings fromlaboratory experiments backed up by the experience of farmers and farm workers around the world[ 13].

in 2007, EFSA gave approval for Monsanto' s MON 863, MON 810 and NK6o3 maize, all genetically engineered to betolerant to Monsanto' s Roundup herbicide, on the basis of evidence from the company' s feeding trials on rats.Differences showed up between rats fed GM maize and the controls, but were dismissed as" not biologicallysignificant"[ 6].

S6ralini and his group at Caen brought a Freedom of information suit in the European Court to obtain the raw data fromMonsanto. On re-analyzing the data, they found that contrary to what the company had claimed and the regulator hadaccepted, there were indeed statistically and biologically significant differences.

But EFSA analysed the data again, and reported that they were still satisfied that none of the differences wasbiologically significant. SEralini and his group decided that the best way to settle the issue would be to conduct theirown experiment.

It turned out to be difficult to arrange the trials because the stewardship agreements farmers have to sign forbid notonly saving seeds but also their use for research without specific permission[ 14]. This effectively prevents anyone elseto learn anything about GM crops beyond what the company wants them to hear.

After some effort, the group in Caen were able to get hold of suitably grown GM maize, NK 603, and a near equivalentnon-GM variety[ 6]. They used 200 animals( too males and too females) in their experiment, which lasted for two years;in contrast, regulatory tests usually last only up to three months and may involve as few as to animals. They ran theexperiment following Good Laboratory Practice( GLP) and the OECD protocol for toxicity trials, and measured moreparameters and more frequently than the OECD protocol requires.

In order to distinguish effects caused by the GM maize, or the herbicide, or both, S6raani and his colleagues divided themale and female rats separately into nine treatment groups,each with ten rats. Three were given in their feed differentproportions of GM maize that had been sprayed with Roundup herbicide, three were given the same proportions ofGM feed that had not been sprayed, and three were given the closest isogenic( i.e. non-GM) maize but had different

amounts of Roundup added to their water. The tenth group was given only non-GM maize with standard feed and plainwater.

The amounts of Roundup that were added were( a) the amount often found in tap water, 5ong/L glyphosate,( b) theUS maximum residue limit( MRL) for glyphosate in some feeds, goo mg/kg, and 2. 25 g/L, half the minimal agriculturalworking dilution. They used Roundup in the experiments, whereas most trials have been conducted using onlyglyphosate. The difference is that like most proprietary formulations, Roundup contains adjuvants, substances addedto enable the active principle( i.e. glyphosate) to penetrate the target plant organism efficiently, and it seemsreasonable to suppose that these might alter its effect on non-target organisms as well.

As they expected from their analysis of Monsanto' s results, S6ralini and his team found signs of toxicity in the livers andkidneys of the treated rats. The most worrying effect, however, and one that had not been anticipated when theexperiment was designed, was the increase in the number of early deaths and of tumours. Among females, therewere 2- 3 times as many deaths in all treated groups compared to controls by the end of the experiment. By thebeginning of the 24th month, 50-8o percent of female animals had developed tumours in all treated groups, whereasonly 3o per cent of controls were affected.

In treated males, liver congestions and necrosis were 2. 5-5. 5 times controls, with marked and severe kidney disease 1. 3-2. 3 times controls. Males also presented 4 times as many large tumours than controls and up to 600 days earlier.

wwari- sis.org. uWGM_ cancer wernirrg_ caln no longer be ignored.php 2/5

r

6AI13 } of Taodn Kills Harlan Kidney Cellsmu - , Biotechnology , Wei Science of the O vertiem , ISIS Carrpalpne , Science and Society PuWcatione

V Big issues V ISIS AR

el)itg Institute of Science in Society

xtiL 12', ti ' N.,, ( 4 tax - ISIS members area login

MEIM1111. 11. 111111. 11111/

Lake 1. 3k 1-, Tweet 95 155printer friendly version

Views and goods advertized

are not necessanly ISIS Report 14/ 03/ 12 Recent Publicationsendorsed by Science inSociety or the Inst. of WWIScience in Society. Bt Toxin Kills Human Kidney Cells LivinRainbow NiO

AdGhoices[ hWater is the

CrylAb bfopesticide kills human cells at low doses as does Roundup herbicide Dr Eva Sirinathsinebji means,Kidney Cancer medium and messagesymptoms

A fully referenced version of this article is posted on ISIS members website and is otherwise available for downloadof life, the rainbow

within that mirrorsaciiptonitind corn... herethe one in the sky

Are You FamiliarOrder Now I more

With Kidney Cancer Please circulate widely and report, but you must give the URL of the original and preserve all the links back toSymptoms? Read

articles an our websiteHere to See. Celebrating

ISIS-A new study shows that low doses of Bt biopesticide CryAtb as well as the glyphosate herbicide, Roundup, kill human Quantum Jazz

2013 Subaru kidney cells. The Bt biopesticide conferring insect resistance and the glyphosate tolerance trait tied to the use of Biology- loo pageOutback Sale glyphosate herbicides account for almost all the GM crops grown worldwide. Bt crops already constitute 39% of

book featuring essays

Subani.Auw- Prs c-.. globally cultivated genetically modified( GM) crops, yet this is the first study that provides evidence on the toxicity of Btand selected

tlu2011 ISISSubaru Dealers are protein in human cells. event of the sameCutting Pricest Find nameSubaru Outback

This work comes at a time when the French environment and agricultural ministers are seeking an EU-wide ban of Order Now i PrQViewDeah Now. Monsanto' s MON8to Bt corn varietyty that is already outlawed in Hungary, Austria, Germany, Greece, and Luxembourg.The EU commission approved this crop in 2009, concluding that it" is as safe as its conventional counterpart with Sam

1 lip To Lose respect to potential effects on human and animal health". In response Luau,

Belly Fatposse to their publication the research team raised

toox

questions about the safety assessment procedure stating that their findings were a" surprising outcome and this risk Renewable by 2050Miracle( ii re rntat' a

was somehow overlooked" in past assessments of such crops. M. A must-read forCut pounds of saving the climate"stomach fat every The research team led by Gilles-Eric SEralini at the University of Caen, France, is already well-known for their Order Now I More infoweek by using this 1

investigations on the endocrine disrupting effects of glyphosate herbicides( seer2j iSiyphosate Kills Rat Testis Cells, Stsweird old tip. The Rainbow54). The researchers tested the effects of CrylAb and CrylAc proteins as well as their combined effects with theherbicide Roundup on the human kidney cell line HEK2 Humans are exposed to hundreds of chemicals in a day,

and the

Used Subaru P Y 93[ 3)• P Y, t worm. me.Outback Sale and their combined effects need to be understood. This is particularly important when considering the new generation Physics of Organisms

Wt\. ntt, to

5/4/13 - Bt Tcolin Kills Human Kidney CellsAdChdas to naturally produced, and the effects of these modification have not been addressed. Bt crops have previously been V t• organic

shown to induce hepatorenai abnormalities In rat feeding studies[ 4] as well as immune responses that may be sustainableClinical Cancer

responsible for allergies observed in farmers and factoryY workers handling St crops,r affectin the eyes, skin and the *fossil Fuei Free

Minh Buv Now 1 More inforespiratory tract( see[ 5]( More illnesses linked to Bt crops,03o).Reduced fertility in mice fed St maize has also been

cancercenter.com

reported(see[ 6] GM Maize Reduces Fertility& Deregulates Genes in Mice.51541). These studies, along with theLearn more about

observation that Bt protein is present in the blood of pregnant women and their babies makes It an urgent matter forinnovative cancer

the health impacts of Bt proteins in GM crops to be thoroughly investigated along with the known effects on the loin the ISIS marlintreatment options P P b'hlY i3 g gprovided by CPCA. environment and non-target species( see[ 7] Bt Crops Failures& Hazard, SIS 53).

list; enter your email

address

I

4/23/13 Gmail-" Stunning' Difference of GM from non- GM Corn

Gm1, .

Stunning" Difference of GM from non-GM Corn

press.release@i. is.org.uk Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 4:58 AMTo: spero.jonathan© gmail.com

The intended recipient for this message is spero.jonathan@gmail. comThe Institute of Science in SocietyScience Society Sustainabilityhttp:// www.i- sis. org. uk

This article can be found on the ISIS website at

http://www. i- sis. org. uk/ Stunning_differences_ of GM from_ non_ GM_ com.php

If you would like to be removed from our mailing listunsubscribe at http://www.i- sis. org. uk/ unsubscribe

or email unsubscnbe@i-sis. org. uk

ISIS Report 22/04/ 13

Stunning" Difference of GM from non-GM Corn

Acomparison of US Midwest non-GM with GM corn shows shockingly high levels ofglyphosate as well as formaldehyde, and severely depleted of mineral nutrientsin the GM corn. Dr Mae-Wan Ho

The results of a comparison of GM and non-GM corn from adjacent Midwest fieldsin the US that first appeared on the Moms Across America March website [ 1] arereproduced in Table 1.

Table 1 Comparison between GM and non-GM corn grown side by side*

for the table, please see the full article on the ISIS website

http:// www.i- sis. org. uk/Stunning_differences_ of GM from_ non_GM_ com.php

The GM corn was grown in a field that has been no-till, continuous GM cornRoundup Ready) for 5-10 years and with a glyphosate herbicide weed control

regime for all of the 10 years. The Non-GM corn has not had glyphosate (orRoundup) applied to the field for at least five years. The GM corn test weightwas 57. 5 lb; and non-GMCom test weight 61. 5 lb.

As Zen Honeycutt, who posted the report commented, glyphosate, shown to be toxicat 1 ppm, is present at 13 ppm in the GM corn. Similarly, formaldehyde at 200ppm is 200 times the level known to be toxic in animals.

The GM corn was also severely depleted in essential minerals: 14 ppm vs 6 130ppm calcium; 2 ppm vs 113 ppm of magnesium; 2 ppm vs 14 ppm of manganese 3 ppmvs 44 ppm of phosphate, 3 ppm vs 42 ppm of sulphur, and so on.

It is not surprising that this analysis has been carried out independently;

hapsJhnail.google.corNmail/?ui= 2&IIF76dbf2e69e&uevpptasearc inboxfith= 13e31b6307r93ff1 1/ 3

4123113 Grrleil-" Stunning" Difference of GM from non-GM Can

i. e.; llot by biotech companies. It was done by farmers themselves. The highlevel of giyphosate is bad enough. Scientific evidence on glyphosate accumulatedover three decades documents miscarriages, birth defects, carcinogenesis,endocrine disruption, DNA damage, neurotoxicity, and toxicity to liver andkidney at levels well below recommended agricultural use (see our recent review2] Why ( lyphosate Should Be Banned, S1S 56). The presence of formaldehyde- a

genotoxic and neurotoxic poison at such enormous concentration - is totallyunexpected.

Analysis obtained by Midwest farmers

Howard Vlieger, a crop nutrition advisor working with family farmers in 10states across the US, who has been inwlvtad in the study and research of GMOssince 1996, explained in an interview[ 3] that people want "a side by sidecomparison" of the corn in the same soil conditions with the only differencebeing the application of glyphosate based herbicide on the GM Roundup Ready ( RR)corn and a conventional herbicide on the non-GM corn. Ibis has not been doneand cannot be done according to the technology agreement signed by a farmerplanting GM seed without being at risk of being sued by the patent holder of theGM RR corn," he said.

In this case, however, ears of corn from two adjacent corn fields in theMidwest, separated only by a fence, were sampled two weeks before harvest. Thecorn fields were selected by a third party and the samples collected in exactlythe same manner. The separately bagged ears of corn were shelled from the coband the grain samples sent to the lab for glyphosate testing. The non-GM cornfield has not been sprayed with glyphosate for at least five years (see Table1).

The samples were sent to a certified laboratory where it was prepared fortesting on gas chromatography- mass spectrometry, an analytical method in whichchemical compounds are first separated on a chromatographic column according totheir size and charge and other chemical properties, and then ionized andidentified based on mass to charge ratios. The RR corn tested contained 13 ppmglyphosate- coincidentally the EPA's newly set legal limit of glyphosate incorn- while the other non-GM corn sample tested free of any glyphosate. The RRcorn sample that tested positive for the glyphosate residue also tested positivefor formaldehyde at a level of 200 ppm.

Read the rest of this report here

http:// www.i- sis. org. uk/ Stunning_differences_ of GM from_ non_GM_ com.php

Or read other articles about GM corn

http:// www.i- sis. org. uk/ GE-maize. php

If you find this report useful, please support ISIS by subscribing to ourmagazine Science in Society, and encourage your friends to do so.http://www.i- sis. org. uk/subscribeOr have a look at the ISIS bookstore for other publicationshttp://www.i- sis. org. uk/onlinestore/ books. php

This article can be found on the ISIS website at

http://www.i- sis.org.uk/ End_of monopolies_ and_megaprofits. php

All new articles are also announced on our RSS feedhttp://www.i- sis.org. uk/feed.xml

hgpel/meN.googfeconimeiUTui= 281i078df2e6944evppr8aseercl inbooBftl= 13e31b6307f93fr1 2/3

IW13 - Syngenta Charged for Covering up Livestock Deaths from GM CornHorn%

vBlase= logy w New Science d the Organism w WS Convokes w Science and Society w Put* atione . Big Issues w 815 Art

r

El institute of Science in Society ice,,, 77,,,,i,! , •; ti,.! eir. si,; lity K

knit. ii ti ,--. :? . lor, AN. ISIS members area login 1 v_

INMININIIIIILike 1. 5k t; Tweet 194 167

printer friendly versionViews and goods advertrzed

are not necessarily ISIS Report 13/ 06/ 12endorsed by Science In Recent Publications

Society or the Inst. ofWWI

Science in Society. Syngenta Charged for Covering up Livestock Deaths UvingRainbow H10AdChokiee Itsfrom GM Corn water Is the

means,

medium andSideEffects from mandmessageItinuidgig Corporation faces criminal charges for concealing own study in which cows died after eating its genetically modified corn of life, the rainbow17,111v.l nurlaw er.c ,. , pr Eva Sirinathsingj i within that mirrors

the one in the skyDiagnosed withOrder Now j moreParkinson's? Get Please circulate widely and repast, but you must give the URL of the original and preserve all the links back to

Free Case Review& articles on our website. If you find this report useful, please support ISIS by subscribing to our magazine science inLegal Help! Society, and encourage your Mends to do so. Or have a look at the ISiS bookstore for other publications Isis-

singSIS-

Quantum Jan2013 Subaru Biotech giant Syngenta has been criminally charged with denying knowledge that its genetically modified( GM) Bt corn Biology- 100 pageOutback Sale kills livestock during a civil court case that ended in 2007 N. book featuring essaysSuharu..Auio- Price .. and selected artwork

Subaru Dealers areSyngenta' s Bt 176 corn variety expresses an insecticidal Bt toxin( Cry1Ab) derived from the bacterium, Bacillus

from the 2011 ISIS

Cutting Prices! Find thuringiensis( Bt) and a gene conferring resistance to glufosinate herbicides. EU cultivation of Bt 176 was discontinuedevent of the same

name

Snbant Outback in 2007. Similar varieties however, including Bt 11 sweet corn are currently cultivated for human and animal Order Now I PreviewDeals Now. consumption in the EU.

Green

5 Signs YouR%Get The charges follow a long struggle for justice by a German farmer whose dairy cattle suffered mysterious illnesses and Energies-Cancer deaths after eating Bt 176. They were grown on his farm as part of authorised field tests during 1997 to 2002. By 2000, 129.1wWWw. new:, Imcx „ In his cows were fed exclusively on Bt 176, and soon illnesses started to emerge. He was paid 40 000 euros by Syngenta

Renewable by zoso

A must-read forThese 5 Signs Wem as partial compensation for 5 dead cows, decreased milk yields, and vet costs( see[ 2] Cows ate GM Maize and Died, VS saving the climate”You That Cancer Is 21). During a civil lawsuit brought against the company by the farmer however, Syngenta refused to admit that its GM Order Now I More infoStarting Inside Your corn was the cause, claiming no knowledge of harm. The case was dismissed and Gloeckner remained thousands ofBody.

euros in debt. The Rainbow4 ,

and the

Bone Cancer Gloeckner continued to lose cows and many more had to be put down due to serious illnesses, compelling him to stop ', won". The

Warning using GM feed from 2002. He approached the Robert Koch Institute and Syngenta to conduct a full investigation. Physics of Organisms

Probably the Mostvntnotnlind cum... However, only one cow was ever analysed and the data are still unavailable to the public. Unsurprisingly, no causal Important Book for

Know The Wanking relationship between the GM feed and deaths was determined; and there is still no explanation for the deaths. the coming ScientificSigns OfBone Revolution" Now in

Cancer. Read Taper But in 2009, the farmer learned of a feeding study allegedly commissioned by Syngenta in 1996 that resulted in four Its Third EditionAdvice Here Now

cows dying in two days. The trial was abruptly terminated. Now Gloeckner, along with a German group called BiindnisBu" Now j More info

Aktion Gen-Kiage and another farmer turned activist Urs Hans, have brought Syngenta to the criminal court to face Ned! The only

charges of withholding knowledge of the US trial, which makes the company liable for the destruction of the farmer' s ';' magazinence

magazine on

65 cows. Syngenta is also charged with the deaths of cattle in the US trial and on Gloeckner' s farm, which should have w. s . earthbeen registered as" unexpected occurrences". Most seriously, the German head of Syngenta Hans-Theo Jahmann, is Science in Society 57charged for withholding knowledge of the US study from the judge and from Gloecker in the original civil court case.

OUT NOW! order your

copy from our aulka

Gloecker's cows not alonestogy

This is by no means the only account of mysterious deaths associated with Bt GM feed. In India where livestock are lefte•

to graze on post-harvest cotton, thousands of livestock deaths have been recorded in different villages across central A

India where Bt cotton is grown( see[ 3] Mass Deaths of Sheep Grazing on Bt Cotton, SIS 30). Shepherds' owncomprehensive

observations and post-mortem analysis carried out in the laboratory revealed abnormal liver, enlarged bile ducts and dossier containingblack patches in the intestine. The shepherds said that the sheep became" dull/depressed" after 2- 3 days of grazing, more than 16o fullystarted coughing with nasal discharge and developed red lesions in the mouth, became bloated and suffered blackish referenced articles

from the Science indiarrhoea, and sometimes passed red urine. Death occurred within 5- 7 days of grazing. Sheep from young lambs to Society archives.adults of 1. 5-2 years were affected. One shepherd reported getting diarrhoea from eating the meat of an affected NOW UPDATEDsheep. The vets declared that the toxicity could be due to the St toxin but this could not be proven as results were Bei Now j More infoconfounded by additional pesticides used on the fields. The shepherds were however, advised against letting the HMO Feesheep graze on any more Bt cotton plants. a,— Exposing the

Hazards of

Philippine villagers living around Bt Maize fields have also suffered deaths and similar illnesses of fever, respiratory,intestinal and skin problem( see[ 4] GM ban long overdue. five deaths and dozens ill in the Philiggyines, 515 29). Five Biotechnology to

our Food Supmortalities were reported in 2003 and subsequently, 38 individuals had their blood analysed and all were positive for o

site Intpgrity ofour Supply

antibodies specific to Cry1Ab, suggesting an immune reaction to the toxin. As is often the case, intimidation and denial Buy Now I More infoby government officials meant that there were no further investigations into the matter. a= Food Futures

Now

vma i- sis.org. uldS'yngenta Charged for_Covering_ Up livestock Deaths from GM Corn.php 1i3 I

514/ 13 Syngenta Charged for Covering up Livestock Deaths from GM Corn

AdQ oteea( b organicCause of deaths unknown SustainableBreast Fossil Fuel Free

There is still no explanation provided by the authorities as to the cause of death of Gloeckner's cows. The biotech More infoCancer

industry claims that Bt toxins are quickly digested in the stomach and are only effective in insect target species.Treatments However, a recent study has found the toxin in the blood of over 8o% of women and their unborn children tested in

Canada[ 5]. Because naturally existing Bt toxins from the soil bacterium have been used fora long time, long-termtoxicology and health risk assessments on at proteins in GM crops were not done. However, there are important

Join the I- SIS mailing

Chat w/ OW differences between the naturally produced toxins that can be washed off the crops, as opposed to geneticallylist enter your email

oncology infoaddress

3' modified toxins that are part and parcel of the GM crop. Independent studies have shown that basing healthexperts and assessments on flawed scientific assumptions is not only arrogant, but foolish. subscribelearn your

treatment Scientific studies dating from the 199os have identified Bt toxins as potent lmmunogens, with CryiAc inducing immuneoptions. responses in mice similar to the cholera toxin[ 6]. Farm workers dealing with Bt cotton have consistently reported

allergic responses requiring hospitalisation in some cases( see[ 7] More Illnesses Linked to Bt Crop, 515 30). Binding ofal CryiAc to the intestine of mice has been shown, with concomitant diarrhoea symptoms[ 8]. A meta-analysis of 3 month

feeding studies in laboratory animals found that Bt maize led to changes in blood protein levels indicative of abnormalliver metabolism( see[ 9] GM Feed Toxic. Meta-Analvsis Confirms, SIS 52). A recent study finds CryiAb toxic to humankidney cells, causing cell death at low doses( see[ 10] : ToijJi i, u; r; at, kid; keiis, 515 52).

To conclude

Safety assessments of new GM products surely need to be tested independently, not controlled by the very industrypushing it onto the market place. Conflicts of interests are obscuring data that are crucial to our farming Industry andanimal welfare, as well as human health.

References

1. Syngenta charged with lying over cattle deaths, GM Watch, 25th May 2012Iittp:/(www.gmwatch.org/ latest-Iistingll- news-items/t_3926-syngenta-charge d- with-ivine-over-cattle-deaths

2. Ho MW and Burcher S. Cows ate GM maize and died.Science in Society2oo4, 21, 4-6.

3. Ho MW. Mass death in sheep grazing on Bt cotton.5cience in Society3o, 12- 13, 20064. Ho MW. GM ban long overdue, dozens ill& five deaths in the Philippines, science in Society 2q, 26-27, 2oo65. Ms A, Leblanc S. Maternal and fetal exposure to pesticides associated to genetically modified foods in Eastern

Townships of Quebec, Canada. Reproductive Toxicolology, 2011, 31, 518-336. Vazquez RI, Moreno-Fierros L, Neri-Bazan L, De La Riva GA, Lopez-Revila R. Bacillus thuringiensis CryiAc

protoxin is a potent systemic and mucosa! adjuvant. Scand. l Immunology 1999 49, 578- 84.7. Ho MW. More illnesses linked to Bt crops. Science in Society 30, 8-1o, 20068. Vazquez- Padrdn RI, Gonzales-Cabrera!, Garcia-Tovar C, Neri-Bazan L, Lopez- Revilla R, Hernandez M, Moreno-

Flerro L, de la Riva GA. CryiAc protoxin from Bacillus thuringiensis sp. kurstaki H D73 binds to surface proteins inthe mouse small Intestine. Biochemical Biophysical Research Communications 2o1o, 271, 54-8.

9. SlrinathsinghJi E. GM feed toxic, new meta-analysis confirms.5cience in Society 62, 30-32, 201110. Sirinathsinghji E. Bt Toxin Kills Human Kidney Cells, science in Society s4, 36-38, 2012

index

14811110111 :` --, . 12' `.. 106.05' ' ' 1694 1 - 1Maine 1, 329. 192 84 121 3 92. 55 6.96 2 4

Newilamposhins891,320,118 97 90 0 84.15 6.37 3 13North Dakota 699,628 65 13 0 35. 1 5.02 4 7

loom 3,074,156 227 108 5 151. 25 4,92 5 2Montana 1, 005, 141 65 38 4 46.75 4.65 6 3

01860i1 3,899,353 164 223 9 ' 175.06 4.49 7 14 - 1Wyoming 576,412 43 14 0 25. 65 4. 45 8 9Wittman 5.725,398 298 257 9 250.66 4.38 9 15 ,Idaho 1, 595, 728 67 67 2 60.5 3. 79 10 10

Rhode island 1. 060,292 61- 24 2 38.45 3.66- 11 24 -. Massachusetts 6,646, 144 313 212 14 237. 65 3.58 12 28

Ham* 1, 992,313 88 22 0 49.5 3.56 13 5South Dakota 833, 354 38 21 0 26.55 3.19 14 8

ConheStieid.._...._. . 3,590.347 154 96 2 112.7 3.14 15 29 .Minnesota 5. 379, 139 168 167 3 151. 05 2. 81 16 17

Masks 731,40 32 12 0 19.8 2,71 17 27 tKentucky 4. 380. 415 162 100 4 118.3 2. 70 18 6CoidfaAo 5.187,582 166 143 4 139.45 2.69 19 31 1Nebraska 1, 855,525 84 26 1 49.6 2. 67 20 12

Washington 6,897,012 148 258 9 183.6 2.66 21 22Michigan 9.883.360 311 269 5 261. 5 2.65 22 25

West Virginia 1, 855.413 82 25 1 4825 2.60 23 11District of Columbia 632,323 35 1 2 16.4 2. 59 24 not ranked

Neei8%k 19,570,261 647 418 15 480.75 2.46 25 42Kansas 2. 885, 905 97 51 2 66.8 2. 31 26 19

NowMexico 2,085,538 69 35 4 47.2 2.26 27 16Virginia 8. 185. 867 227 174 20 182 45 2. 23 28 34

Maryland 5,884,563 152 119 3 12225 2.06 29 39Delaware 917. 092 33 9 0 18 9 2 06 30 45

Norge Carbine 9.752,073 207 228 13 197.05 2.02 31 32Pennsylvania 12, 763,536 254 295 10 248.05 1. 94 32 38indium 6,537,334 162 118 1 126.1 1. 93 33 30 1MISSOUri 6. 021. 988 155 102 4 116.05 1. 93 34 18

hisho ere 4,822,023 149 56 4 9265 1. 92 35 26 1

Ohio 11. 544, 225 264 199 6 208.95 1. 81 36 35Sa1h Cgoos a 4.729,723 " 124'-- --. 59 2 82.55 1. 75 - - 37 33

Arkansas 2, 949, 131 80 25 4 47. 65 1. 62 38 21

Nooks 12,875.255 292 151 9 200.25 1. 56 39 40Tennessee 6,456.243 93 111 3 92. 1 1. 43 40 36

Mississippi 2984,926 75 19 2 . . . 42.5 1, 42 41 23 ,California 38,041, 430 827 358 9 53415 1. 40 42 41

Georgia 9,919.945 118 150 3 120.9 1. 22 43 44 tUtah 2, 855,287 37 39 0 34 2 1. 20 44 37

Oklahoma 3,814.820 71 30 2 45.65 1.20 45 20 1

New Jersey 8, 864, 590 133 98 0 103.95 1. 17 46 48Nevada 2.758,931 38 24 0 27.9 1. 01 47 47Arizona 6,553,255 82 45 2 57. 35 0.88 48 49

LotBpana 4.601.893 62 21 2 3716 0.62 49 46Florida 19, 317, 568 202 109 5 140.45 0. 73 50 50

Teats . 26,059,203 164 171 7 161.45 0.58 51 43

Sources and methodology:Population 2012- US Census bureau estimates as of 7112012 hop.itoww.census.gov/popestkfatalstateltotaler20121

Fanners Markets as of March 14, 2013- hap// search arcs uedagovearmersmerkehl

CSAs as of March 20, 2013: Mp:iAswelocaaarvee orgrFood hubs as or Jan 4, 2011 httpl eww.rns.usde govIAMSv1 01FoodH,* a

Weightad score Farmers Markets 45%, CSAs 45%, Food Hubs 10%

Score per 100,000 wangled scorel(pors adon1100,000)

Copyright 2013, Strolling of the Heifers, Inc.Pen ias.on es gamed lo rproduce fis chat I, wy repot eat mammas the%/ oam oleo Halters LOOM! beta with a SS to: htpihw.seaanpoaMrfers.mm2013-

Page 1

s

l r

S T;= F Oregon' s Senator Jeff MerkleyS} \

Dear Hal.

Oregonians want to know what's in their food. And they should have the right to know. Consumers deserve fulland accurate information so they can make the choices that are best for their families.

Labeling genetically engineered( GE) products, which is already done in over 60 countries, is a commonsenseway to bring more transparency to our grocery store shelves.

Recently, I joined nine ofmy Senate colleagues in introducing the Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-KnowAct. This bill would require the Food and Drug Administration( FDA) to clearly label genetically engineeredfoods so that consumers can make informed choices about what they eat.

The FDA already has the ability to require the labeling of GE products, but has chosen not to. I believe that's thewrong way to go in a world where families want more, not less, information about where their food comes fromand what's in it. I will continue to urge the FDA to act— and if they won't, I will be pushing to pass thislegislation and make sure that full and accurate labeling of genetically engineered foods becomes a reality. Ourconsumers deserve no less.

Please know that I will continue to stay on top of this issue, and I hope you will, too.

All my best,

Jeffrey A. MerkleyUnited States Senator

JEFF MERKLEY

tA 3OREGON4=

6,,,_ rv. U ) 1j` IO V 1 t l; G Ov)L

J

1 Gd fr L....11, 11'

00(0.0(1 )/-°) ei_rUre0

Buy1. KEEP DANGEROUS CHEMICALS OUT OF YOUR KITCHENThe Environmental Protection Agency( EPA) considers 60% of all herbicides( weed-killers), 90% of all fungicides

mold-killers) and 30% of all insecticides( insect-killers) to be cancer-causing, yet USDA data reveals that over 70%of conventionally grown foods are contaminated by one or more of these toxic substances. These same widely used ychemicals are also linked to birth defects, nerve damage, hormone disruption and genetic mutations.

By promoting healthy soils, robust insect-predator populations and other holistic farm management practices,organic farmers entice their thriving crops to produce top quality fruits, vegetables and grains without the use ofthese harmful synthetic chemicals.

Another thing to think about: as there is yet no mandatory labeling of foods containing Genetically ModifiedOrganisms, the only way to be sure that your family isn' t eating GMOs is to buy organic food, where the use ofsuch questionable `edibles' is prohibited.

2. PROTECT THE HEALTH OF YOUR CHILDRENPesticides pose special concerns to children because of their high metabolisms, low body weight and theircontinuous growth and development. In two separate reports, both the Natural Resources Defense Council( 1989)and the Environmental Working Group ( 1998) found that millions of American children are exposed to levels ofpesticides through their food that surpass limits considered to be safe. The food choices you make now will impactyour child' s health in the future.

3. PROTECT FARM WORKER HEALTHA National Cancer Institute study found that farmers exposed to herbicides had a risk of contracting cancer six timesgreater than that of non-farmers. Farm worker health is an even greater concern in developing countries where

pesticide use is poorly regulated; and with our global economy, more and more of our food is coming from overseas.An estimated 20,000 accidental deaths occur worldwide from pesticide exposure each year. By buying organic food,we are helping to provide a healthier working environment for more farm workers every year!

4. PREVENT SOIL EROSIONThe Soil Conservation Society estimates that more than 3 billion tons of topsoil is eroded from U.S. farmlandsannually ( think ` dust bowl'). The living soil nurtured by organic farmers produces many gums, resins and othernatural substances that help to hold together the many particles of ` dirt', greatly reducing the amount of soil that iscarried away by wind and water. In organic farming, soil is seen as the foundation of the food chain and is activelybuilt up, whereas in conventional farming soil is used more as a lifeless medium for holding plants in a verticalposition so that they can be chemically fertilized. As a result, American farms are suffering from the worst soilerosion in history; and without soil, where will the food come from?

5. PROTECT WATER QUALITYWater makes up two-thirds of our body mass and covers three-fourths of the planet. Despite its importance, theEPA estimates that pesticides contaminate the groundwater in 38 states, contaminating the primary source of

drinking water for more than half the country' s population! Due in large part to the runoff from rains washing

water-soluble commercial fertilizers down rivers to the sea, many coastal regions exhibit symptoms of overenrichment; suffocating algal blooms, loss of environmental diversity and reduced production in valuable

fisheries.

6. CONSERVE ENERGYWe are all aware of the high cost of gasoline and our dependence upon foreign oil, but what you may not know isthat modern farming uses more petroleum than any other single industry. In fact, farming consumes more than 1/ 8of our nation' s entire energy supply! More of this energy is being used to produce the synthetic fertilizers used inconventional farming than to till, cultivate and harvest all of the crops in the United States. But once again organicfarmers buck the trend by employing more labor-intensive methods such as hand weeding, cover cropping and usingnatural soil amendments that put vigor and life back into the soil, rather than chemically face- lifting their land withsynthetic herbicides and fertilizers as the non-organic conventional farms do.

7. HELP SMALL FARMSThe pressures of agri-business have led to an aggressive consolidation of farms over the past several decades.Although more and more large scale farms are making the conversion to organic practices, most organic farms aresmall, independently owned and operated family farms of less than 100 acres. With 750,000 family farms lost in thepast ten years, and more than half of the country' s food supply coming from the largest 1% of farms, organic

farming could be one of the few survival tactics remaining for the small family farm.

Here at Gooseberries we have a strong commitment to the little guys; just look for our` local' label to know that youare buying from family farms right here in our community. Know yourfarmer, know yourfood.

8. SUPPORT A TRUE ECONOMY

While organically grown foods may seem more expensive, conventional food prices do not reflect many hiddencosts born by taxpayers. Non-organic food prices do not include the costs of federal subsidies to conventionalagriculture, pesticide regulation and testing, the hazardous waste disposal and treatment associated with themanufacturing and use of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers, loss of topsoil and wildlife habitat, contamination ofdrinking water or the health care costs of farm workers poisoned by the toxic chemicals they are exposed to.

As consumers, we can pay now, or pay later. Buying organic food is a way of voting with your wallet; you aresaying loud and clear that the long-term costs of` cheap' non-organic food are simply way too expensive!

9. ORGANICS HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO HAVE GREATER NUTRITIONAL VALUEMounting evidence shows that organically grown fruits, vegetables and grains contain greater amounts of vitaminsand minerals such as vitamin C, iron and magnesium than their conventional counterparts. A 2001 review of 41published studies also noted that five servings of organic vegetables( lettuce, spinach, carrots, potatoes and cabbage)provided the recommended daily intake of vitamin C, while a similar consumption of chemically grown vegetablesdid not.

It makes sense that growing crops in vibrant, healthy soil will yield foods replete with vital nutrients, and if your dietis made up of such foods, well, that brings us to our final consideration....

10. YOU ARE WHAT YOU EATIt' s really simple... you are what you eat, and so in turn, the foods that you eat are what they ate. This is the circleof life.

Organic farmers feed the living soil with such natural goodies as composted manures, fish waste, cover crops andseaweed. The healthy soil, alive with worms and bugs and billions of microorganisms eat this stuff( and each other)and through this invisible process feed the plants that wind up in your belly, eventually building and fueling everycell in your body. Cool, huh!

Modern industrial agriculture, on the other hand, drenches the soil with only a few, isolated synthetic chemicalnutrients( so harsh that most soil life is killed) which are directly utilized by, and so become, the foods that end upon many of our tables.

Natural or synthetic, organic or conventional, which do you want to be? The choice is yours.