MONSANTO AND HYBRID FOODS

compiled by Dee Finney

Anatomy of a food scare

10 August 1998: Arpad Pusztai, a biochemist at the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen, appears in a documentary on British TV to warn about
the inadequate testing of GM foods. He claims to have carried out experiments showing that feeding genetically engineered potatoes to young
rats suppresses their immune responses and harms their growth and development. Pusztai's remarks are seized upon by opponents of GM foods
everywhere.

12 August 1998: The Rowett says Pusztai muddled his results and was wrong to talk about unpublished findings. The institute says that the rats
had eaten not GM potatoes but ordinary potatoes spiked with a jack bean lectin, one of a family of proteins used by plants to ward off insect pests
and which are often toxic to mammals. Environmentalists cry "cover-up". Biotechnologists say it is much ado about nothing, as nobody planned to sell potatoes engineered to carry the lectin and in any case, even if Pusztai had done the experiments he described, all it proved was that if you insert a gene for a toxin into a potato the potato becomes toxic.

14 August 1998: Pusztai, who is past retirement age, is suspended and told that his annual contract will not be renewed. He is instructed not to
speak to the media about his results.

28 October 1998: A panel set up by Philip James, director of the Rowett institute, criticises Pusztai, but does not accuse him of scientific
fraud. It becomes clear that, despite the institute's initial claims, his experiments did involve potatoes engineered to contain a gene for a lectin.

However, the Rowett claims there is no "statistically significant" evidence in Pusztai's data suggesting that rats were harmed by the
transgenic potatoes. The institute's report into the affair also states that Pusztai's experiments focused on potatoes containing a lectin from the
snowdrop, not from the jack bean, as was previously thought.

November 1998: Pusztai's supporters circulate his "alternative report" among sympathetic scientists. This contradicts the Rowett's report,
reiterating the claim that GM potatoes harmed the rats.

12 February 1999: Twenty scientists from 14 countries who have examined Pusztai's report accuse the Rowett of bowing to political pressure.
The group, including former associates of Pusztai and active opponents of biotechnology, calls for a moratorium on GM crops on the grounds that the
study reveals an unforeseen hazard that would not be picked up by standard toxicity tests. Environmental groups say this is the first evidence of
toxicity caused by the process of genetic engineering itself.

13 February 1999: The British government rejects calls for a moratorium amid allegations that it is in the pocket of the biotech industry.

14 February 1999: Further claims of a cover-up surface when it is revealed that the Rowett received £140 000 of funding from GM food giant
Monsanto before the Pusztai affair blew up. Newspaper reports also claim the British government offered millions of pounds in inducements to encourage biotech firms to invest in Britain.

15 February 1999: Members of the government show signs of bowing to media and public pressure. Environment minister Michael Meacher says he will bring wildlife specialists onto the committee that oversees the release of GM crops into the environment, which has come under fire for being dominated by scientists associated with the biotech industry. He also floats the idea of establishing a "GM food commission". Meanwhile, opposition politicians call for the resignation of science minister Lord Sainsbury, who in the past has invested in companies with interests in GM products.

16 February 1999: The gagging order placed on Pusztai in August is lifted and his "alternative" report is published on the internet at www.rri.sari.ac.uk/press/.

Frankenfears

Andy Coghlan, David Concar, Debora MacKenzie

Mar 9, 1998

AT FACE value, Arpad Pusztai's findings cast a pall over the entire GM food industry. His results, obtained at the Rowett Research Institute in
Aberdeen, suggest that procedures routinely used in genetic engineering can make plants harmful. No wonder, then, that the British public and
media--primed to distrust official assurances about food safety after their experience with BSE--are up in arms.

Yet Pusztai's data remain mired in confusion. His claim that rats are harmed by eating a particular kind of genetically engineered potato has yet
to be confirmed. And even if the potatoes are harmful, this may not have any  relevance to GM crops approved for sale. Any ill effects could have been caused by something specific to the transgenic potatoes he used--which were never intended for human consumption--rather than the process of genetic engineering itself.

Pusztai was trying to discover if a protein taken from snowdrops could harm rats when fed to them in potatoes. Several labs are investigating whether the gene for this protein, which is of a type known as a lectin, could be added to crops such as rice to make them resistant to sap-sucking insects. So data on its safety are important.

Some of Pusztai's rats were fed ordinary potatoes laced with the lectin. Others ate potatoes genetically engineered to make the lectin themselves. A control group of rats ate ordinary potatoes.

Pusztai found differences in the size of several organs in young rats eating the transgenic potatoes (see Figure), and evidence of damage to their
immune systems. Rats eating the lectin-spiked potatoes showed no such effects, he claims, suggesting that something other than the lectin caused
the damage. One suggestion is that the problem lies with what genetic engineers call the "construct"--the package of DNA introduced along with the
foreign gene.

This DNA includes a gene that makes the potato resistant to the antibiotic kanamycin and another that makes a substance which stains blue.
These extra genes give researchers a convenient way to identify plants that have incorporated the lectin gene into their DNA. The construct also
includes a "promoter" sequence from a cauliflower mosaic virus, which boosts the production of the lectin protein.

The idea that such a construct is a health risk flies in face of the conventional biological wisdom. But given that similar constructs are found
in other GM plants, it's a disturbing suggestion.

One of Pusztai's supporters, Stanley Ewen, a pathologist at the University of Aberdeen, has made further observations that add to the
controversy. When Ewen examined samples of gut lining from rats which had eaten the transgenic potatoes, he saw abnormalities such as increased
production of cells in intestinal crypts, the clefts between the finger-like villi that line the wall of the small intestine.

Pusztai's own report on his experiments, which he sent to Rowett director Philip James in October, was released last week by the environmental group Friends of the Earth at a press conference attended by scientists sympathetic to Pusztai. They are angry with the institute for disciplining Pusztai after he spoke out on television (see "Anatomy of a food scare").

Most of the researchers contacted by New Scientist are unconvinced by Pusztai's data and sceptical of the theory that the construct is to blame.
One problem is that Pusztai's report does not include key raw data on the spiked potatoes needed to verify his claim that the genetic manipulation was the source of the problems.

The most likely explanation, says Willy Peumans, whose team at the Catholic University of Leuven in Belgium has supplied Pusztai with lectins
to feed to rats, is that the process of inserting the lectin gene into potato cells and their growth in tissue culture disrupted the behaviour of
the potatoes' other genes. This may have altered the plants' biochemistry and made them produce high levels of other toxic substances, such as
alkaloids. This theory is strengthened by the fact that the protein, starch and glucose levels of the transgenic potatoes all differed markedly from
those of the natural plant. They contained 20 per cent less protein than normal, for example, and Pusztai had to add protein supplements to the rats'
meals.

If the altered potatoes' strange biochemistry, rather than the inserted DNA, lies behind their toxic effects, the implications for food safety are less serious. Crop engineers already test for altered biochemistry, and regulators won't approve such a plant. "We would chuck it out straight away," says Mike Gasson of the Institute of Food Research in Norwich, who sits on the British government's Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes.

Companies that produce GM crops claim that their own toxicity tests would have identified similar problems. James Astwood, head of product
safety at Monsanto's headquarters in St Louis, Missouri, says the company routinely carries out feeding trials on mice in which internal organs are
closely examined and weighed. Novartis of Basel, Switzerland, which makes maize with a gene for an insecticidal toxin, says that mice were unharmed when they ate the maize.

On one thing, however, everyone agrees. Answering all the questions raised by Pusztai's preliminary findings will require tests on plants engineered to contain DNA constructs, but lacking genes for lectin or the other genes added in commercially grown GM crops. "What we need is a set of data from experiments with the construct alone," says Ewen.

Anatomy of a food scare

10 August 1998: Arpad Pusztai, a biochemist at the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen, appears in a documentary on British TV to warn about
the inadequate testing of GM foods. He claims to have carried out experiments showing that feeding genetically engineered potatoes to young
rats suppresses their immune responses and harms their growth and development. Pusztai's remarks are seized upon by opponents of GM foods
everywhere.

12 August 1998: The Rowett says Pusztai muddled his results and was wrong to talk about unpublished findings. The institute says that the rats
had eaten not GM potatoes but ordinary potatoes spiked with a jack bean lectin, one of a family of proteins used by plants to ward off insect pests
and which are often toxic to mammals. Environmentalists cry "cover-up". Biotechnologists say it is much ado about nothing, as nobody planned to sell potatoes engineered to carry the lectin and in any case, even if Pusztai had done the experiments he described, all it proved was that if you insert a gene for a toxin into a potato the potato becomes toxic.

14 August 1998: Pusztai, who is past retirement age, is suspended and told that his annual contract will not be renewed. He is instructed not to
speak to the media about his results.

28 October 1998: A panel set up by Philip James, director of the Rowett institute, criticises Pusztai, but does not accuse him of scientific
fraud. It becomes clear that, despite the institute's initial claims, his experiments did involve potatoes engineered to contain a gene for a lectin.

However, the Rowett claims there is no "statistically significant" evidence in Pusztai's data suggesting that rats were harmed by the transgenic potatoes. The institute's report into the affair also states that Pusztai's experiments focused on potatoes containing a lectin from the snowdrop, not from the jack bean, as was previously thought.

November 1998: Pusztai's supporters circulate his "alternative report"  among sympathetic scientists. This contradicts the Rowett's report,
reiterating the claim that GM potatoes harmed the rats.

12 February 1999: Twenty scientists from 14 countries who have examined Pusztai's report accuse the Rowett of bowing to political pressure.
The group, including former associates of Pusztai and active opponents of biotechnology, calls for a moratorium on GM crops on the grounds that the
study reveals an unforeseen hazard that would not be picked up by standard toxicity tests. Environmental groups say this is the first evidence of
toxicity caused by the process of genetic engineering itself.

13 February 1999: The British government rejects calls for a moratorium amid allegations that it is in the pocket of the biotech industry.

14 February 1999: Further claims of a cover-up surface when it is revealed that the Rowett received £140 000 of funding from GM food giant
Monsanto before the Pusztai affair blew up. Newspaper reports also claim the British government offered millions of pounds in inducements to encourage biotech firms to invest in Britain.

15 February 1999: Members of the government show signs of bowing to media and public pressure. Environment minister Michael Meacher says he will bring wildlife specialists onto the committee that oversees the release of GM crops into the environment, which has come under fire for being dominated by scientists associated with the biotech industry. He also floats the idea of establishing a "GM food commission". Meanwhile, opposition politicians call for the resignation of science minister Lord Sainsbury, who in the past has invested in companies with interests in GM products.

16 February 1999: The gagging order placed on Pusztai in August is lifted and his "alternative" report is published on the internet at www.rri.sari.ac.uk/press/.
 

February 18, 1999

Denver Post

BRUNO, Saskatchewan - On a cold January morning in central Canada, Percy Schmeiser looks over his frozen fields.

"Here's where all the trouble began," he says, pointing to where private investigators last year arrived uninvited and snipped samples of his crops
for DNA tests.

Schmeiser, 68, has been farming these fertile acres all his life, growing canola for the valuable oil in its seeds. And as farmers have done for
thousands of years, he has saved some seeds from each year's harvest to replant his fields the following season.

Now, he says, "for doing what I've always done," he is being sued by agribusiness giant [ Monsanto Co. ] in a landmark "seed piracy" case.

The outcome could influence how much control biotechnology companies will have over the world's food supply in the next millennium, and is
highlighting a major source of friction as the genetic revolution spills into the world of agriculture.

Schmeiser is one of hundreds of farmers in the United States and Canada who stand accused by Monsanto of replanting the company's patented,
gene-altered seeds in violation of a 3-year-old company rule requiring that farmers buy the seeds fresh every year.

He vehemently denies having bought Monsanto's seeds, saying pollen or seeds must have blown onto his farm, possibly from a neighbor's land.

It's the company, Schmeiser says, that ought to be rebuked for its pattern of "harassment."

Besides sending Pinkerton detectives into farmers' fields, the company sponsors a toll-free "tip line" to help farmers blow the whistle on their
neighbors and has placed radio ads broadcasting the names of noncompliant growers caught planting the company's genes. Critics say those tactics are fraying the social fabric that holds farming communities together.

"Farmers here are calling it a reign of terror," Schmeiser says. "Everyone's looking at each other and asking, 'Did my neighbor say something?'" A threatening concept

Cases like Schmeiser's are also raising alarms within organizations that deal with global food security. That's because three-quarters of the
world's growers are subsistence farmers who rely on saved seed.

"This is a very alien and threatening concept to farmers in most of the world," said Hope Shand, research director of Rural Advancement Foundation International, an international farm advocacy group based in Pittsboro, N.C. "Our rural communities are being turned into corporate police states and farmers are being turned into criminals."

Monsanto representatives say the company must strictly enforce the "no replant" policy to recoup the millions of dollars spent developing the
seeds and to continue providing even better seeds for farmers.

Already, they say, the new varieties are improving farmers' yields and profits and allowing them to abandon extremely toxic chemicals in favor of
more environmentally friendly ones.

"This is part of the agricultural revolution, and any revolution is painful. But the technology is good technology," said Karen Marshall, a
spokeswoman for Monsanto in St. Louis. Expensive research

Monsanto's 210-acre biotechnology complex, 25 miles west of St. Louis, is the largest biotechnology research center in the world, featuring 250
separate laboratories, 100 room-sized plant growth chambers and 2 acres of greenhouses arrayed on the main building's enormous rooftop.

It was here that company scientists took a gene from a bacterium that produces an insect-killing toxin called "Bt" and transferred it to corn,
cotton and other crops to make plants that exude their own insecticide Here, too, researchers gave crops a gene that allows them to survive
Monsanto's flagship weed killer, Roundup, which normally kills them.

Monsanto estimates that it takes 10 years and about $300 million to create commercial products such as these. For every new kind of engineered seed that makes it to field trials, 10,000 have failed, officials say.

To recover this huge investment, the company has opted not to sell its engineered seeds in the traditional sense but to "lease" them, in effect,
for one-time use only - and to go after anyone who breaks the rules.

Suing one's own customers "is a little touchy," Marshall conceded. But after going to so much trouble to build a better seed, "we don't want to
give the technology away." Seed development changes

It wasn't always this way. Until about a decade ago, crop and seed development in the United States and abroad was mostly a government
business. The Department of Agriculture, in conjunction with the nation's land grant colleges and local agricultural extension agents, developed,
tested and distributed new varieties of seeds, asking nothing more of citizens than that they pay their taxes. Under that system, patents were
infrequently pursued and rarely enforced. And seed saving and trading were commonplace.

That began to change in the 1980s when Congress passed legislation, including the Bayh-Dole Amendment, that encouraged federal agencies to
cooperate more closely with the private sector. Private seed companies could profit handsomely by selling seeds that were developed in large part
with taxpayer dollars. Today, a handful of American and European agricultural companies control a major portion of the world's certified
food seed supply.

Monsanto is the king of them all. Its gene alterations can be found in hundreds of crop varieties sold under license by many seed companies. And
the total acreage devoted to gene-altered crops has increased astronomically since the first varieties were approved in 1996.

This year, about half of the 72-million-acre U.S. soybean harvest is expected to be genetically engineered to tolerate Roundup. More than half
of the 13 million acres of U.S. cotton will be engineered as well, as will be about 25 percent of the nation's 80 million acres of corn, either for
Roundup resistance or to exude Bt.

Although there are lingering concerns that in the long run genetically engineered crops could end up hurting the environment, the company argues
that they could actually help. In one small study, the reduced use of pesticides with engineered plants appears to have resulted in increased
survival of beneficial insects, which eat insect pests and serve as food for struggling songbird populations.

*** Percy Schmeiser is not easily intimidated. He was the mayor o Bruno for 17 years and for five years was a member of the Saskatchewan
legislative assembly. "I've seen a lot of politics," he says. "But I've never seen a situation to create hard feelings and divide people as what
I'm seeing now."

Last July, Schmeiser got a call from a local Monsanto representative who said he'd heard that the farmer was growing the Roundup- resistant canola
and asked for permission to test the plants. Schmeiser refused, so the company sampled some plants on a public right-of-way near his fields. Some
of those apparently tested positive for Monsanto's gene, because a judge subsequently provided a court order allowing the company to take plants
from Schmeiser's property.

The problem, Schmeiser says, is that there are a lot of plants in the area with Monsanto's gene in them. Roundup Ready pollen from other farmers'
fields is blowing everywhere in the wind, he says, and he's seen big brown clouds of canola seed blowing off loaded trucks as they speed down the
road around harvest time - spilling more than enough to incriminate an innocent farmer.

Back near his house, Schmeiser points to a wild canola plant poking out of the snow near the base of a telephone pole. "I sprayed Roundup around
these poles twice last summer to control weeds," he says. How is it, he asks, that this canola plant survived?

Inside his modest, tidy home, he pulls out agricultural articles documenting many instances of Roundup Ready canola cross-pollinating with
normal canola. Monsanto has a problem, says Terry J. Zekreski, Schmeiser's attorney: It's trying to own a piece of Mother Nature that naturally
spreads itself around.

AGAINST THE GRAIN
A new book by Marc Lappe and Britt Bailey, AGAINST THE GRAIN, makes it clear that genetic engineering is revolutionizing U.S.
agriculture almost overnight.[1]

In 1997, 15% of the U.S. soybean crop was grown from genetically engineered seed. By next year, if Monsanto Corporation's timetable unfolds on schedule, 100% of the U.S. soybean crop (60 million acres) will be genetically engineered.[1,pg.5] The same revolution is occurring, at the same pace, in cotton. Corn, potatoes, tomatoes and other food crops are lagging slightly behind but, compared to traditional rates of change in farming, they are being deployed into the global ecosystem at blinding speed.

The mass media have largely maintained silence about the genetic engineering revolution in agriculture, and government regulators have imposed no labeling requirements, so the public has little or no knowledge that genetically altered foods are already being sold in grocery stores everywhere, and that soon few traditional forms of food may remain on the shelves.

Genetic engineering is the process whereby genes of one species are implanted in another species, to give new traits to the recipient. Traditionally the movement of genes has only been possible between closely-related species. Under the natural order established by the Creator, there was no way dog genes could get into cats. Now, however, genetic engineering allows scientists to play God, removing genes from a trout or a mosquito and implanting them in a tomato, for better or for worse.

Three federal agencies regulate genetically-engineered crops and foods -- the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The heads of all three agencies are on record with speeches that make them sound remarkably like cheerleaders for genetic engineering, rather than impartial judges of a novel and powerful new technology, and all three agencies have set policies that:

** No public records need be kept of which farms are using genetically-engineered seeds;

** Companies that buy from farmers and sell to food manufacturers and grocery chains do not need to keep genetically-engineered crops separate from traditional crops, so purchasers have no way to avoid purchasing genetically engineered foods;

** No one needs to label any crops, or any food products, with information about their genetically engineered origins, so consumers have no way to exercise informed choice in the grocery store. In the U.S., every food carries a label listing its important ingredients, with the remarkable exception of genetically engineered foods. These policies have two main effects:

(1) they have kept the public in the dark about the rapid spread of genetically engineered foods onto the family dinner table, and

(2) they will prevent epidemiologists from being able to trace health effects, should any appear, because no one will know who has been exposed to novel gene products and who has not.

Today Pillsbury food products are made from genetically-engineered crops. Other foods that are now genetically engineered include Crisco; Kraft salad dressings; Nestle's chocolate; Green Giant harvest burgers; Parkay margarine; Isomil and ProSobee infant formulas; and Wesson
vegetable oils. Fritos, Doritos, Tostitos and Ruffles Chips -- and french fried potatoes sold by McDonald's -- are genetically engineered.[1,pg.92]
By next year, if Monsanto's plans develop on schedule -- and there is no reason to think they won't -- 100% of the U.S. soybean crop will be genetically engineered. Eighty percent of all the vegetable oils in American foods are derived from soy beans, so most foods that contain vegetable oils will contain genetically engineered components by next year or the year after.[1,pg.52]

It is safe to say that never before in the history of the world has such a rapid and large-scale revolution occurred in a nation's food supply. And not just the U.S. is targeted for change. The genetic engineering companies (all of whom used to be chemical companies) -- Dow, DuPont, Novartis, and preeminently, Monsanto -- are aggressively promoting their genetically engineered seeds in Europe, Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, India,
China and elsewhere. Huge opposition has developed to Monsanto's technology everywhere it has been introduced outside the United
States. Only in the U.S. has the "agbiotech" revolution been greeted with a dazed silence.

Monsanto -- the clear leader in genetically engineered crops -- argues that genetic engineering is necessary (nay, ESSENTIAL) if
the world's food supply is to keep up with human population growth. Without genetic engineering, billions will starve, Monsanto says. However, neither Monsanto nor any of the othergenetic engineering companies appears to be developing genetically engineered crops that might solve global food shortages. Quite the opposite.

If genetically engineered crops were aimed at feeding the hungry, then Monsanto and the others would be developing seeds with certain predictable characteristics: (a) ability to grow on substandard or marginal soils; (b) plants able to produce more high-quality protein, with increased per-acre yield, without increasing the need for expensive machinery, chemicals, fertilizers, or water; (c) they would aim to favor small farms over larger farms; (d) the seeds would be cheap and freely available without restrictive licensing; and (e) they would be for crops that feed people, not meat animals.

None of the genetically engineered crops now available, or in development (to the extent that these have been announced) has any of these desirable characteristics. Quite the opposite. The new genetically engineered seeds require high-quality soils, enormous investment in machinery, and increased use of chemicals. There is evidence that their per-acre yields are about 10% lower than traditional varieties (at least in the case
of soybeans),[1,pg.84] and they produce crops largely intended as feed for meat animals, not to provide protein for people. The genetic engineering revolution has nothing to do with feeding the world's hungry.

The plain fact is that fully two-thirds of the genetically engineered crops now available, or in development, are designed specifically to increase the sale of pesticides produced by the companies that are selling the genetically engineered seeds.[1,pg.55] For example, Monsanto is selling a line of
"Roundup Ready" products that has been genetically engineered to withstand heavy doses of Monsanto's all-time top money-making
herbicide, Roundup (glyphosate). A Roundup Ready crop of soybeans can withstand a torrent of Roundup that kills any weeds
competing with the crop. The farmer gains a $20 per acre cost-saving (compared to older techniques that relied on lesser quantities of more expensive chemicals), but the ecosystem receives much more Roundup than formerly. To make Roundup Ready technology legal, EPA had to accommodate Monsanto by tripling the allowable residues of Roundup that can remain on the crop.[1,pg.75] Monsanto's patent on Roundup runs out in the year 2000, but any farmer who adopts Roundup Ready seeds must agree to buy only Monsanto's brand of Roundup herbicide. Thus Monsanto's patent monopoly on Roundup is effectively extended into the foreseeable future -- a shrewd business maneuver if there ever was one. However, this should not be confused with feeding the world's hungry. It is selling more of Monsanto's chemicals and filling the corporate coffers, which is what it was intended to do. "Feeding the hungry" is a sales gimmick, not a reality.

Monsanto's other major line of genetically engineered crops contains the gene from a natural pesticide called Bt. Bt is a naturally-occurring soil organism that kills many kinds of caterpillars that like to eat the leaves of crops. Bt is the pesticide of choice in low-chemical-use farming, IPM [integrated pest management] and organic farming. Farmers who try to minimize their use of synthetic chemical pesticides rely on an
occasional dusting with Bt to prevent a crop from being overrun with leaf-eating caterpillars. To them, Bt is a God-send, a miracle of nature.

Monsanto has taken the Bt gene and engineered it into cotton, corn and potatoes. Every cell of every plant contains the Bt gene and thus produces the Bt toxin. It is like dusting the crop heavily with Bt, day after day after day. The result is entirely predictable, and not in dispute. When insect pests eat any part of these crops, the only insects that will survive are those that are (a) resistant to the Bt toxin, or (b) change their diet to prefer other plants to eat, thus disrupting the local ecosystem and perhaps harming a neighboring farmer's crops. According to Dow Chemical scientists who are marketing their own line of Bt-containing crops, within 10 years Bt will have lost its usefulness because so many insects will have developed resistance to its toxin.[1,pg.70] Thus Monsanto and Dow are profiting bountifully in the short term, while destroying the usefulness of the one natural pesticide that undergirds the low-pesticide approach of IPM and organic farming. It is another brilliant -- if utterly ruthless and antisocial -- Monsanto business plan.

Ultimately, for sustainability and long-term maximum yield, agricultural ecosystems must become diversified once again. This is the key idea underlying organic farming. Monoculture cropping - -- growing acre upon acre of the same crop -- is the antithesis of sustainability because monocultures are fragile and unstable, subject to insect swarms, drought, and blight. Monocultures can only be sustained by intensive, expensive inputs of water, energy, chemicals, and machinery. Slowly over the past two decades, the movement toward IPM and organic farming has begun to take hold in this country -- despite opposition from the federal government, from the chemical companies, from the banks that make farm loans, and from the corporations that sell insurance. Now comes the genetic engineering revolution, which is dragging U.S. agriculture back down the old path toward vast monocultures, heavy reliance on machinery, energy, water, and chemicals, all of which favors the huge farm over the small
family operation. It is precisely the wrong direction to be taking agricultural technology in the late 20th century, if the goals are long-term maximum yield, food security, and sustainability.

It is a wrong direction for another reason as well. When 100% of the soybeans in the U.S. are grown from Roundup Ready seed -- next year -- then 100% of America's soybean farmers will be dependent upon a single supplier for all their seed and the chemicals needed to allow those seeds to thrive. In sum, Monsanto will have achieved a monopoly on a fundamental food crop. It is clear that Monsanto's goal is a similar monopoly on every major food crop here and abroad. If something doesn't change soon, it is safe to predict that a small number of "life science" corporations (as they like to call themselves) -- the majority of them American and the remainder European -- will have a monopoly on the seed needed to raise all of the world's major food crops. Then the hungry, like the well-fed, will have to pay the corporate owners of this new technology for permission to eat.

From: betty martini <Mission-Possible-USA@Altavista.net>
To: Ban-GEF@lists.greenbuilder.com <Ban-GEF@lists.greenbuilder.com>
Date: Tuesday, February 02, 1999 5:57 PM
Subject: Press Release: In response to AP, CNN, Time, etc. attempt to crush the expose on the deadly effects of aspartame (NutraSweet/Equal/Spoonful) The Nancy Markle Story! Contact Betty Martini, 770 242-2599

It's an old plot. We've seen it many times. A gigantic corporation contaminates the community, spreading deadly toxins. People are sick, children die, but the greedy poisoner remains undetected. At last a persistent reporter finds the source. Now denials begin, authorities side with the polluters, against the people. A smoke screen of propaganda and ridicule is raised so business and dying can continue as usual.

Some mainstream media too often dependent on advertising from these corporations won't expose them, and would never allow a bright reporter
to tell the story. Monsanto, Coke and Pepsi have fat checkbooks so will the pride of true journalism in getting the facts to the people take a
backseat to exposing them in the NutraSweet issue?

Someone using the name of Nancy Markle took a report from www.dorway.com I had written about lecturing at the World Environmental Conference, and added her name. She made some changes but the message of aspartame mimicking MS as it destroys the central nervous system was exposed as well as other problems caused by the toxin. It is escalating Alzheimer's and Parkinson's Disease as well as precipitating diabetes. It causes blindness and even Focus (http://www.focusnewsletter.org/aspartame.htm) in Nov, l998 (Vol. 3, No. 3) had an article on aspartame titled: What's Blinding the World! Dr. Louis Elsas testimony before congress (pediatric professor at Emory University) was discussed in the post and quoted him saying aspartame is a neurotoxin and teratogen (triggers birth defects ). It also triggers lupus. This article was carried on 450 global networks and circulation on the Internet and beyond could have caused circulation to exceed CNN and AP.

Thousands of Aspartame Disease victims emailed and called as well as media , hospitals, clinics and medical establishments. A support list was setup on line on the Internet as victims counted the days off aspartame and watched symptoms disappear. They tell of the addiction of this drug
masquerading as an additive, and shattered years of medical problems. You could weep at the stories. My computer has crashed three times because it can't take the thousands of cases coming in and we are in the process of adding the biggest hard drive and memory made to record what may be one of the largest epidemics in world history. H. J. Roberts, M.D., said in his first press conference that if something wasn't done about aspartame then in 5 or 10 years we would have a plague on our hands. Now Dr. Roberts has declared aspartame disease to be a world epidemic and is in the process of publishing the medical text on the world plague. His other publications can be gotten at http://www.icanect.net/sunpress

In talking to AP, Lauran Neergaard, said she would tell the story if there was a peer reviewed study on MS and aspartame. She mentioned she was on the web site and said "but I didn't mention your name". No , she didn't and neither did she mention the web site. And there she was on a web site
that showed that the story was true containing even government documents. There is the Bressler Report, the FDA audit of the horror of the original
studies that approved aspartame, the FDA's own report of 92 documented symptoms from coma to death triggered by aspartame, the damning CDC
investigation and even the protest of the National Soft Drink Association, showing that Coke and Pepsi knew aspartame breaks down into a witches brew of toxins at 86 degrees before they ever put it in pop. They also knew it was not a diet product because it is a drug that makes you crave
carbohydrates (last page of report) and misrepresented this to the public. If you want to get fat NutraSweet is where its at!

I have no sympathy for the MS Society because they have been sent information for years including Dr. Roberts position paper MS or Aspartame
Disease? and never uttered a word to warn the victims. In Atlanta at their walk-a-thon while Mission Possible gave out medical documentation on
aspartame's ability to mimic MS and destroy the central nervous system they gave out Diet Coke. They were furious that these walkers were getting this information.

So the MS Society and the FDA who over-ruled a Board of Inquiry to approve this deadly toxin were swamped with calls. I personally spoke to Dr.
Rudolph Harris at the FDA who admitted all the calls. I told him to stop giving out false information that aspartame is safe, and that we had the
actual government documents on www.dorway.com to show they were lying. He answer to me: "We can't refute that!" I asked him again why the FDArefused to answer the 26 questions on www.dorway.com sent to them by Newt Gingrich. Could it be that if they answered truthfully they would have to recall aspartame. Instead they simply sent me propaganda and federal registries and told Gingrich's office they have to talk to their
attorneys. But they were quick to talk to CNN to try and squelch the outcry of the public even though they knew the truth. Those there to
solve the problem ARE THE PROBLEM!

As to a study on aspartame and MS, there was one in l983/84 that did show that aspartame destroyed the central nervous system, triggered brain tumors and seizures and other neurological horrors. But it was never published -it showed aspartame to be a killer. Two people died under mysterious circumstances. A statement from the translator, notarized, is on www.dorway.com There is a new study that indicates auto-antibodies
contribute to destruction of nerve fibers myelin sheath, the hallmark of multiple sclerosis (University of California ). H. J. Roberts, M.D. over
three decades ago explained in publications about MS that if the myelin is damaged by any cause the body may take antibodies to the myelin fragments which then can initiate a vicious cycle which can breakdown myelin. Aspartame or its byproducts can damage the nerves sheath, and the body may respond by making the antibodies to it.

References: Journal of American Geriatric Society, Volume 14, page 586, l966 Journal of American Geriatric Society, Volume 12, 9/26/ 64
On the Etiology, Treatment and Prevention of MS, South Medical Journal, Volume 59, page 940, l966

On this new study Dr. Roberts emphasized to me that the model of experimental EAE is not the counterpart of human MS and is not related to
reality in patients who have pre clinical MS or evolutionary MS .

Also, there is a new study on Parkinson's Disease which clearly points to environmental factors and diet rather than to genetics.

Neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock, M.D., author of Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills (1 800 - 643- 2665) gave me these points which support this study:

(1) Parkinson's Disease is a disorder who's cause appears from substantial evidence, to be related to excitotoxicity. These toxinsdestroy the cells in the brain central to this disease.
(2) Excitotoxins cause these brain cells to generate enormous amounts of free radicals. This is true of MSG and Aspartic Acid ( aspartame ).
(3) There is substantial circumstantial evidence that dietary excitotoxins , including aspartame, can aggravate these destructive changes in the Parkinson's brain .
(4) The additional toxins - DKP , aspartate, methanol, formaldehyde and formic acid - add to this injury .
(5) Recent evidence demonstrates that aspartame product, formaldehyde - accumulates within cells and damages proteins and DNA .


Michael Fox was a Diet Pepsi spokesman and wondered why he got an old man's disease at the age of 30? Be assured he now knows and has been warned that aspartame changes the dopamine level of the brain . Think of the ramifications of this. Read Senator Metzenbaum's bill that never got out of committee on the problems surfacing in the population in the 80's that he wanted to have investigated by independent studies. Notice aspartame is a drug that interacts with other drugs !!!!!!!

A good deal of Dr. Blaylock's material is on www.dorway.com including a lecture where he says the reactions to aspartame are not allergic in nature
but toxic like arsenic and cyanide. There is the interview on Mission Possible radio also in transcript form where he tells how studies are
doctored, how aspartame triggers ADD, and why pilots are having seizures and other problems. Three American Airline pilots who were heavy users of aspartame have died, one in flight, and another has had a stroke. I can't think of anything more hazardous to aviation safety than allowing pilots to
consume a deadly neurotoxin known to be a seizure triggering drug ( proven in a pivotal study on 7 monkeys in which 5 had grand mal seizures and 1
died, (SC18862), that also triggers confusion, memory loss, blindness and cardiac symptoms.

Christine Gorman who wrote the Time magazine article admits in her article that she searched the web for the problems like multiple sclerosis,
seizures, etc. in the Nancy Markle article and found the web site where there was almost an identical letter. So she too was on www.dorway.com .
She said she didn't believe any chemical could cause all these problems, yet there on the web site was the FDA report admitting 92 symptoms and
there are many more. She had to have seen the secret trade information exposed in Congress where the original manufacturer, Searle, admitted they
had to consider complete conversion to DKP ----A BRAIN TUMOR AGENT. Yet, she puts down brain tumors. How famous is the doctor who made world history in l996 over the aspartame/brain tumor link ? Dr. John Olney is so famed he founded the field of neuroscience known as excitotoxicity and his update is on DORway. Christine picked up industry and flaming web sites in her article but she wouldn't give the one site that had the government documents and world expert reports on the subject.

Christine Gorman even picked up the propaganda on Monsanto's web site, all this baloney about trace amounts of methanol exist naturally in many
fruits and vegetables. The truth of the matter is in ASPARTAME: METHANOL AND THE PUBLIC HEALTH by Dr. Woodrow Monte, Journal of Applied Nutrition, Volume 36 , Number 1, l984 where he says: "Ethanol, the classic antidote for methanol toxicity, is found in natural food sources of methanol at concentrations 5 to 500,000 times that of the toxin. Ethanol inhibits metabolism of methanol and allows the body time for clearance of the toxin through the lungs and kidneys." You don't slur your words when you eat an orange but many do with aspartame.

In Dr. Roberts book Sweet'ner Dearest on page 168 and 169 he says "Producers and their representatives have become masters at dodging the
very mention of its name, especially on talk shows . They prefer to call this chemical "aspartic acid and phenylalanine as the methyl ester." In
the body, however, the "methyl ester" translates into METHYL ALCOHOL .. also known as METHANOL and WOOD ALCOHOL !!! The public is more familiar with methanol as an ingredient of fuels (such as Sterno) and antifreeze. (The methyl ester is required for aspartame's taste since
aspartyl-phenylalanine is tasteless. )" Dr. Roberts goes on to say: " Just in case you didn't know, methanol is a severe metabolic poison. The
dictionary defines "poison" as a substance having an inherent tendency to impair health or destroy life. ... Significant amounts of methyl alcohol in
its free form are rarely found in nature. The ingestion of relatively small amounts can result in blindness , other serious illnesses and even
death."

Dr. Ralph Walton on 60 Minutes explained there are only 90 valid studies on aspartame that were independent and 83 showed problems with the toxin. The 7 non-industry studies attesting to aspartame 's safety were 6 studies from the FDA and 1 literature review reflecting almost exclusively the industry sponsored research. Since the FDA has been trying to cover up this issue for years you can dismiss the 6 studies. They went so far as
to refer complaints to the AIDS Hotline as discussed in Congress!

Dr. Walton himself did a study although NutraSweet refused to sell him the aspartame because they had no control over the study. After one subject
started bleeding from the eyes, another had a retinal detachment and others complained of being poisoned, the institution stopped the study.

How do you do a study on MS and aspartame ? Who wants to sign up for a dose of poison? That was tried in South America with people in poor
villages who wouldn't be missed they thought. The biggest study on aspartame has been done on the consumer public in 100 countries of the
world, and the cases on the sick and dying continue to pour in.

This press release will travel in the path of the original article signed by Nancy Markle. Responsible journalists will tell this side of the story
and publish after research of the DORway web site. Those who have sold out to industry will defend it to the end. Most people with problems from
aspartame will continue to search and find us, as they have been doing. For those who believe comments in articles like Time and AP may go on using this toxin until it can be removed from the market. They can go on losing babies or bearing those with deformities, having seizures, developing
Alzheimer's (Defense Against Alzheimer's Disease - 1 800 - 814-9800 - Dr. Roberts), going blind and destroying their central nervous system. These
reporters will have to live with this all the days of their life because they saw the truth and didn't publish it.

Coca Cola profits tumbled 27% in the fourth quarter and 14% in l998. Monsanto who makes NutraSweet is trying to sell the NutraSweet Kelco
Company! To avoid billions of dollars of law suits? The news is out and it can't be covered up. Aspartame exposers are even called toxic
terrorists! Indeed, Nutrasweet has terrorized nutrition and disbeliveers embark on the Monsanto Titanic. Its iceberg proof, you know, and up for
sale ! I hope that every responsible journalist publishes this side of the story, those who believe like Mission Possible that death and
disability are not acceptable costs of business. Fraud in science is despicable, as despicable as failure to tell consumers the truth when the
facts are known by the media. Now Monsanto wants to get approved neotame, an even more potent aspartame!

Betty Martini, Mission Possible International (a worldwide volunteer force in the US and many countries warning the world off aspartame) 770 242-2599

For a map of the 450 pages on www.dorway.com email help@dorway.com with nothing in message text or subject line. Also check out
http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame and aspartamekills.com

***********************************************************************

1. Take the 60-day No Aspartame Test and send us your case history. Mission Possible International 5950-H State Bridge Rd. #215, Duluth, GA 30097 USA

2. Tell your doctor and all of your friends!

3. Return Asparcidal food to the store. (anything with Monsanto's NutraSweet/Equal/Spoonful/Benevia/NatraTaste)
VISIT http://www.dorway.com Get links to over 30 sites on aspartame
VISIT http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/ ..FAQs & Cases
VISIT http://www.notmilk.com Exposing Bovine Growth Hormone
Disability and Death are not acceptable costs of business!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aspartame - The Silent Killer
http://www.dorway.com
--
With kindest regards,

Barry Carter
<bcarter@igc.apc.org>
Blue Mountain Native Forest Alliance
WEB Page: http://www.triax.com/bmnfa/index.htm
Voice: 541-523-3357
Fax: 541-523-9438

 RHIZOME_RAW: GENETICS ACTIVISTS CREATE SUPERWEED]
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 09:54:07 -0600
From: "C:\\FTP\\justis_p._jones\\" <booyaa@aurorablue.org> Organization:
http://www.aurorablue.org
From: ir-heath@mail.netnames.net (by way of rachel greene)
To: list@rhizome.org

Cultural Terrorist Agency
PRESS RELEASE
***immediate release***
24th January 1999

GENETICS ACTIVISTS CREATE SUPERWEED

Launch of Natural Reality SuperWeed Kit 1.0 Photo-opportunity 12.00 noon Wednesday 27th January 1999

On Wednesday 27th January 1999, Michael Boorman of Natural Reality will launch the 'Natural Reality SuperWeed Kit 1.0 - a DIY kit capable of producing a genetically mutant superweed, designed to attack corporate monoculture'. Heath Bunting and Rachel Baker, founders of The Cultural Terrorist Agency [1] who have financed SuperWeed Kit 1.0 will also speak at the launch in the Nash Room, The Institute of Contemporary Arts, London, UK. The launch starts at 12:15 noon and will be completed by 13.00.

Natural Reality SuperWeed Kit 1.0 [2], contains a mixture of naturally occuring and genetically mutated (GM) Brassica seeds (e.g. Oilseed Rape, Wild Radish, Yellow Mustard, Shepard's Purse). If these seeds are allowed to germinate and cross pollinate, a SuperWeed [3] will be created that will be resistant to current herbicides (e.g. Monsanto's RoundupÅ), thus not only threatening the profitability of conventional and GM Brassica crops [4], but also of herbicide production and distribution.

This kit be will distributed throughout the UK to interested parties along with tactical suggestions and planting instructions.

If released, SuperWeed 1.0 will not only destroy the profitability all GM crops, but also of conventional and organic crops. This genetic contamination will be irreversible.

Michael Boorman is one of the California Croppers who held football match early Thanksgiving morning at the "Gill Tract" gardens, California, USA, resulting in the destruction of a crop of genetically-engineered corn owned by the University of California, in protest over UC-Berkeley signing a multimillion dollar research deal with biotech giant Novartis.[5]

Michael Boorman of Natural Reality said "Genetic hacker technology gives us the means to oppose this unsafe, unnecessary and unnatural technology. I hope that this SuperWeed Kit will empower others in their actions. We are engaged in a biological arms race with corporate monoculture."

Heath Bunting is a well known internet hacker activist responsible for information subversion campaigns against organisation such as Glaxo, Nike and 7-Eleven stores. He is a founder member of irational.org collective [6].

Heath Bunting of irational.org said "Biotechnology is not only the next battleground on which the control of life and land is fought, but also
on which life itself is redefined. It is essential that the concepts of property and representation in this arena are seriously challenged."

Rachel Baker is a network activist with a well documented history of actions against organisations including Sainsbury, Tesco and
American Express. She is also a member of irational.org collective [6].

Rachel Baker of irational.org said "Millions of ordinary people are very worried about genetically modified foods and I am one of them....With genetically modified foods I believe we have reached the thin edge of the wedge, we are messing with the building blocks of life and it's scary."

Michael Boorman email: superweed@hotbot.com
Heath Bunting email: jan99@irational.org
Rachel Baker email: rachel@irational.org
Hayvend email: hayvend@backspace.org

ENDS

Editors Notes

[1] The Cultural Terrorist Agency (CTA) is a funding agency committed to supporting contestation of property and representation. CTA turns it's enemies best weapon, that being investment, back onto itself.

Cultural terrorism can be defined as an offensive against dominant systems of meaning, and their defining of reality and nature, within the realms of propaganda and disinformation.

Website: http://www.irational.org/cta/

[2] Natural Reality SuperWeed Kit 1.0 is available from Hayvend, ICA Bar, London, UK for the price of £1.00

Website: http://www.backspace.org/hayvend/

SuperWeed Kit 1.0 can also be ordered free of charge by post directly from the Natural Reality via the internet.

Website: http://pages.hotbot.com/politics/superweed/

[3] "SCIENTISTS last night confirmed the green campaigner's worst nightmare: genetically engineered crops can lead to superweeds which shrug off weedkiller."

Website: http://www.islandnet.com/~ncfs/maisite/ipr-ge02.htm

[4] There are currently no commercially grown GM crops in Britain, although soya, maize and oil seed rape or products produced from them are imported. Commercial planting of GM oil seed rape is expected in summer/autumn 1999. Natural Reality is calling for a total ban on the planting of GM crops.

[5] See release dated November 26, 1998 entitled Gardeners Decontaminate Genetic Corn Crop.

Website: http://users.westnet.gr/~cgian

[6] Irational.org is an anarcho collective consisting of over 20 people internationally working mainly in the areas of contestation of property and representation:

Website: http://www.irational.org/

Picture Editors Notes

[1] As part of the launch of the SuperWeed Kit there will be photo-opportunity at 12.00 noon in the ICA Bar, London, with Michael Boorman of Natural Reality and Heath Bunting and Rachel Baker of irational.org demonstrating how to obtain SuperWeed Kit 1.0 from Hayvend. The photo-opportunity will be complete by 12.15 p.m.

[2] Freelance photographer Rob Todd will be covering the launch, contact: +44 (0)467 420 283

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 RHIZOME COMMUNICATIONS
 post: list@rhizome.org
 questions: info@rhizome.org
 answers: http://www.rhizome.org

posts to RHIZOME RAW are subject to the terms set out in the Subscriber Agreement available online at
<http://www.rhizome.org/subscribe/>.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.inannareturns.com
"See God in Every Eye" --Inanna, Goddess of Love V.S. Ferguson author, Inanna Returns and Inanna Hyper-Luminal

Subject: Fwd: [spiritcomm-l] Fwd: [melchizedek-l] NUTRA-SWEET... THE KILLER

From: Mylordian@aol.com
To: Spirit Communication List <spiritcomm-l@spiritweb.org>
Subject: [spiritcomm-l] Fwd: [melchizedek-l] NUTRA-SWEET... THE KILLER !

Greetings: This is an important address that contains vital information for all of us so as to be well informed of and certainly aware of how we can be directly and adversely affected by the consumption of this artificial sweetener - Aspartame and its marketed labels- as indicated below...read and be informed. Forewarned is Forearmed I say....I know what I'll do: Avoid it like the poison it is..Please pass this info on...


WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL CONFERENCE
and the
MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS FOUNDATION
F.D.A. ISSUING FOR COLLUSION WITH MONSANTO
Article written by Nancy Markle (1120197)

I have spent several days lecturing at the WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL CONFERENCE on "ASPARTAME marketed as 'NutraSweet', 'Equal', and 'Spoonful"'. In the keynote address by the EPA, they announced that there was an epidemic of multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus, and they did not understand what toxin was causing this to be rampant across the United States. I explained that I was there to lecture on exactly that subject.

When the temperature of Aspartame exceeds 86 degrees F, the wood alcohol in AS PA RTAME coverts to formaldehyde and then to formic acid, which in turn causes metabolic acidosis. (Formic acid is the poison found in the sting of fire ants). The methanol toxicity mimics multiple sclerosis; thus people were being diagnosed with having multiple sclerosis in error. The multiple sclerosis is not a death sentence, where methanol toxicity is.

In the case of systemic lupus, we are finding it has become almost as rampant as multiple sclerosis, especially Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi
drinkers. Also, with methanol toxicity, the victims usually drink three to four 12 oz. Cans of them per day, some even more. In the cases of systemic
lupus, which is triggered by ASPARTAME, the victim usually does not know that the aspartame is the culprit The victim continues its use aggravating the lupus to such a degree, that sometimes it becomes life threatening. When we get people off the aspartame, those with systemic lupus usually become asymptomatic. Unfortunately, we can not reverse this disease.

On the other hand, in the case of those diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis, (when in reality, the disease is methanol toxicity), most of the symptoms
disappear. We have seen cases where their vision has returned and even their hearing has returned. This also applies to cases of tinnitus.

During a lecture I said "If you are using ASPARTAME (NutraSweet, Equal, Spoonful, etc.) and you suffer from fibromyalgia symptoms, spasms, shooting pains, numbness in your legs, cramps, vertigo, dizziness, headaches, tinnitus, joint pain, depression, anxiety attacks, slurred speech, blurred
vision, or memory loss -- you probably have ASPARTAME DISEASE!" People were jumping up during the lecture saying, "I've got this, is it reversible?" It is rampant. Some of the speakers at my lecture even were suffering from these symptoms. In one lecture attended by the Ambassador of Uganda, he told us that their sugar industry is adding aspartame! He continued by saying that one of the industry leader's son could no longer walk - due in part by product usage!

We have a very serious problem. Even a stranger came up to Dr. Espisto (one of my speakers) and myself and said, '1Could you tell me why so many people seem to be coming down with MS?11 During a visit to a hospice, a nurse said that six of her friends, who were heavy Diet
Coke addicts, had all been diagnosed with MS. This is beyond coincidence. Here is the problem. There were Congressional Hearings when aspartame was included in 100 different products. Since this initial hearing, there have been two subsequent hearings, but to no avail. Nothing as been done. The drug and chemical lobbies have very deep pockets. Now there are over 5,000 products containing this chemical, and the PATENT HAS EXPIRED!!!!!

At the time of this first hearing, people were going blind. The methanol in the aspartame converts to formaldehyde in the retina of the eye.
Formaldehyde is grouped in the same class of dmgs as cyanide and arsenic-- DEADLY POISONS!!! Unfortunately, it just takes longer to quietly kill, but it is killing people and causing all kinds of neurological problems.

Aspartame changes the brain's chemistry. It is the reason for severe seizures. This drug changes the dopamine level in the brain. Imagine what
this drug does to patients suffering from Parkinson's Disease. This drug also causes Birth Defects.

There is absolutely no reason to take this product. It is NOT A DIET PRODUCT!!! The Congressional record said, "It makes you crave carbohydrates and will make you FAT". Dr. Roberts stated that when he got patients off aspartame, their average weight loss was 19 pounds per person. The formaldehyde stores in the fat cells, particularly in the hips and thighs.

Aspartame is especially deadly for diabetics. All physicians know what wood alcohol will do to a diabetic. We find that physicians believe that they
have patients with retinopathy, when in fact, it is caused by the aspartame. The aspartame keeps the blood sugar level out of control, causing many patients to go into a coma. Unfortunately, many have died. People were telling us at the Conference of the American College of Physicians, that they had relatives that switched from saccharin to an aspartame product and how that relative had eventually gone into a coma. Their physicians could not get the blood sugar levels under control. Thus, the patients suffered acute memory loss and eventually coma and death.

Memory loss is due to the fact that aspartic acid and phenylalanine are neurotoxic without the other amino acids found in protein. Thus it goes
past the blood brain barrier and deteriorates the neurons of the brain. Dr. Russell Blaylock, neurosurgeon, said, "The ingredients stimulates the
neurons of the brain to death, causing brain damage of varying degrees. Dr. Blaylock has written a book entitled "EXCITOTOXINS: THE TASTE THAT KILLS" (Health Press 1-800-643-2665). Dr. H.J. Roberts, diabetic specialist and world expert on aspartame poisoning, has also written a book entitled "DEFENSE AGAINST ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE" (1-800-814-9800). Dr. Roberts tells how aspartame poisoning is escalating Alzheimer's Disease, and indeed it is. As the hospice nurse told me, women are being admitted at 30 years of age with Alzheimer's Disease. Dr. Blaylock and Dr. Roberts will be writing a position paper with some case histories and will post it on the Internet. According to the Conference of the American College of Physicians, 'We are talking about a plague of neurological diseases caused by this deadly poison".

Dr. Roberts realized what was happening when aspartame was first marketed. He said "his diabetic patients presented memory loss, confusion, and severe vision loss". At the Conference of the American College of Physicians, doctors admitted that they did not know. They had wondered why seizures were rampant (the phenylalanine in aspartame breaks down the seizure threshold and depletes serotonin, which causes manic depression, panic attacks, rage and violence).

Just before the Conference, I received a FAX from Norway, asking for a possible antidote for this poison because they are experiencing so many
problems in their country. This poison is now available in 90 PLUS countries worldwide. Fortunately, we had speakers and ambassadors at the
Conference from different nations who have pledged their help. We ask that you help too. Print this article out and warn everyone you know. Take anything that contains aspartame black to the store. Take the "NO ASPARTAME TEST" and send us your case history.

I assure you that MONSANTO, the creator of aspartame, knows how deadly it is. They fund the American Diabetes Association, American Dietetic
Association, Congress, and the Conference of the American College of Physicians. The New York Times, on November 15, 1996, ran an article on how the American Dietetic Association takes money from the food industry to endorse their products. Therefore, they can not criticize any additives or tell about their link to MONSANTO. How bad is this? We told a mother who had a child on NutraSweet to get off the product. The child was having grand mal seizures every day. The mother called her physician, who called the ADA, who told the doctor not to take the child off the NutraSweet. We are still trying to convince the mother that the aspartame is causing the seizures. Every time we get someone off of aspartame, the seizures stop. If the baby dies, you know whose fault it is, and what we are up against. There are 92 documented symptoms of aspartame, from coma to death. The majority of them are all neurological, because the aspartame destroys the nervous system.

Aspartame Disease is partially the cause to what is behind some of the mystery of the Dessert Storm health problems. The burning tongue and other
problems discussed in over 60 cases can be directly related to the consumption of an aspartame product. Several thousand pallets of diet
drinks were shipped to the Dessert Storm troops. (Remember heat can liberate the methanol from the aspartame at 86 degrees F). Diet drinks sat
in the 120 degree F. Arabian sun for weeks at a time on pallets. The service men and women drank them all day long. All of their symptoms are
identical to aspartame poisoning. Dr. Roberts says "consuming aspartame at the time of conception can cause birth defects". The phenylalanine
concentrates in the placenta, causing mental retardation, according to Dr. Louis Elsas, Pediatrician Professor - Genetics, at Emory University in his
testimony before Congress.

In the original lab tests, animals developed brain tumors (phenylalanine breaks down into DXP, a brain tumor agent). When Dr. Espisto was lecturing on aspartame me, one physician in the audience, a neurosurgeon, said, "when they remove brain tumors, they have found high levels of aspartame in them".

Stevia, a sweet food, NOT AN ADDITIVE, which helps in the metabolism of sugar, which would be ideal for diabetics, has now been approved as a
dietary supplement by the F.D.A. For years, the F.D.A. has outlawed this sweet food because of their loyalty to MONSANTO.

If it says "SUGAR FREE" on the label-- DO NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT IT!!!!!l! Senator Howard Hetzenbaum wrote a bill that would have wamed all infants, pregnant mothers and children of the dangers of aspartame. The bill would have also instituted independent studies on the problems existing in the population (seizures, changes in brain chemistry, changes in neurological and behavioral symptoms). It was killed by the powerful drug and chemical lobbies, letting loose the hounds of disease and death on an unsuspecting public. Since the Conference of the American College of Physicians, we hope to have the help of some world leaders. Again, please help us too. There are a lot of people out there who must be warned, please let them know this information.

Fat Cat Corp. with Fat Rat gene can Kill Crops

Europe's answer to the American Home "Monster" Terminator Technology is the Verminator, a new chemically activated seed killer. The Verminator kills seeds - in one of the invention's claims - by switching on rodent fat genes that have been bioengineered into crops. Zeneca BioSciences (UK) is vying with the "Monster" (Monsanto) to become Top Cat in the global seed industry even if it means playing cat and mouse with farmers and destroying their age-old practice of saving and breeding crop varieties.

Zeneca, the life industry spin-off of the old ICI (Imperial Chemical Industries), says it will apply for patents in 58 countries for its invention
that renders it impossible for farmers to save "protected" seed from growing season to growing season (WO 94/03619). The technology, which activates a "killer" gene (or prevents the expression of genes crucial to normal plant development), weighs in whenever a chemical "trigger" is applied to seed at a desired point during plant maturation. For example, genetically engineered seed could be produced that would not germinate unless exposed to Zeneca's private chemical trigger. Or, plants growing in the field could be genetically programmed to become stunted, not properly reproduce, or not resist disease(s) unless sprayed with Zeneca's chemical formula.

In the patent description, Zeneca described the source of one such "killer" gene as coming from "mammalian uncoupling protein isolated from the brown adipose tissue of Ratus ratus" - or the "Fat Rat" gene. The move by the British firm is hard on the heels of the US patent (US 5,723,765) granted in March to the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Delta and Pine Land Company for what RAFI dubbed "Terminator Technology". Within weeks of that patent announcement, the US agrochemical behemoth Monsanto bought Delta and Pine for US$1.76 billion. Then, in June, Monsanto and American Home Products, one of the biggest cats in the chemical jungle, announced that they would merge. The union instantly created the worldís largest pesticide firm, second largest seed enterprise, and a giant that ranks in the top ten in pharmaceuticals and veterinary medicines. Zeneca is currently the worldís fifth largest seed company with annual sales of US$437 million in 1997. It is also an important crop chemical and drug company.

"The Verminator is a broader and more pervasive variation on the Monsterís Terminator," says Pat Mooney, Executive Director of RAFI. "It looks like Zeneca can either choose to sell seeds that are already incapable of replanting - or trigger the "killer" by chemical spraying at a later date." RAFIís Edward Hammond adds, "Zeneca may also be in a position to attach its genetic 'bomb' to destroy specific genes or gene sequences within the plant. This could allow the seed to be regrown while still eradicating key genetic traits."

A major objective of both the Verminator and the Terminator (which Monsanto euphemistically describes as a "Technology Protection System") is to provide a technological platform (or Trojan Horse) upon which any number of proprietary genes can rest with impunity. The traits will function for the bought seed but either not rejuvenate (in the case of both Verminator and Terminator) or (for Verminator alone) not function in subsequent generations.

Camila Montecinos, an agronomist coordinating the Latin America-wide Community Biodiversity Development and Conservation (CBDC) Programme based in Temuco, Chile, is incensed. "The patent absurdly suggests that the Verminator will benefit farmers by being a 'container' for genetically-engineered varieties or by preventing seed sprouting before harvest," she says (seeds of small grain cereals like wheat or rice sometimes germinate on the plant when conditions are too hot or humid or the harvest is delayed. This can lead to a loss of market quality.) "But the real goal is to hook farmers on genetically ëmutilatedí seed that does not properly reproduce. Farmers will lose their 12,000 year-old right to save seed. This is biological warfare."

The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO, Rome) estimate that 1.4 billion poor people depend on farm-saved seed for their food security. The farmers involved often grow their food under unfavourable conditions of little commercial interest to global seed companies. Thus, the farmers adapt or breed their own varieties that meet their own conditions and needs. Verminator and Terminator can make it impossible for these farmers not only to save seed but to create the varieties they need to feed people.

Half a world away, Monica Opole of Kenya, the CBDCís project coordinator in that country, agrees. "The flexibility of the Verminator is scary," Opole says, "In practice, farmers could buy seed believing it can be reused a second season only to find that it cannot or that it is debilitated by inherited Verminator genes. Worse still, the farmer could find that their neighbor bought the Verminator and it outcrossed into their field, leaving them with dead seeds. The farmer loses her crop, the family loses their food. Who knows how the Verminator will interact with nature, especially as it spreads out over time and inevitably crosses with farmers' varieties. This kind of patent is a threat to family food security."

In her office in the suburbs of metro Manila, Neth Daño, executive director of SEARICE (Southeast Asian Regional Institute for Community Education) is furious. "Monsanto and Zeneca have a large chunk of the global seed industry. Where they lead, others will follow. Farmers are under attack. Acting like God, these companies are pulling farmers to their knees to pray 'Give us our daily bread' by forcing them to buy seeds every season. This is grossly immoral and perverse! Our governments have got to come to our defense. Both the Terminator and the Verminator should not be accepted for patenting on the grounds that they violate ordre public."

RAFIís research director, Hope Shand has been tracking the Terminator Trend for some time. "Itís not just these two technologies," Shand asserts,
"Monsanto and Pioneer are also developing new wheat hybrids they believe can take over the market." Hybrids are the "Terminator Rex" of crops. The second- generation seed will either not breed true - or it will be sterile. Until recently small grain cereals such as wheat and rice were difficult to commercially hybridize. "Now, that seems to be changing," says Shand, "The opportunity to force farmers back to buy seed every season has led the multinationals to focus on hybrid terminators too."

"With hybrids, the critical technology is CMS - cytoplasmic male sterility," Rolf Johnsson of Swedenís Friends of the Earth reports. "The Terminator Trend is becoming so wide spread, we need to form a global coalition to fight for the right of farmers to save seed." When studying the Terminator, Johnsson spotted an oblique reference to the Verminator and alerted fellow NGOs to the patent. Together with a large number of civil society organizations, RAFI is studying a number of other patents and technologies associated with the Terminator Trend.

For background on the Trend and on the activities of the global seed trade,
please visit RAFI's homepage at http://www.rafi.org.
<A HREF="http://www.rafi.org/pr/release19.html">RAFI</A>

New Patents for Terminator Seeds Threaten Farmers and Food Security

February 1, 1999

The Rural Advancement Foundation International (RAFI) announced that it has uncovered over three dozen new patents describing a wide range of techniques that can be used for genetic sterilization of plants and seeds. The disclosure follows on the heels of a controversial patent unveiled last year and christened the "Terminator" by RAFI. The Terminator patent, jointly owned by  he U.S. Department of Agriculture and a Monsanto subsidiary, continues to generate worldwide protest and debate because it renders farm-saved seed sterile and forces farmers to buy commercial seed market every year.

According to RAFI, every major seed and agrochemical enterprise is developing its own version of Terminator seeds. Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Monsanto are among the multinational corporations who have sterile seeds in the pipeline, while others like Pioneer Hi-Bred, Rhone Poulenc, and DuPont have seed technologies that could easily be turned into Terminators.

"These technologies are extremely dangerous," explains Pat Mooney of RAFI, "because over 1.4 billion farmers -- primarily poor farmers in Africa, Asia and Latin America -- depend on farm-saved seed as their primary seed source. If they can't save seed, they can't continue to adapt crops to their unique farming environments, and that spells disaster for global food security."

The seed sterilization patents uncovered by RAFI reveal that companies are developing "suicide" seeds whose genetic traits can be turned on and off by an external chemical "inducer" mixed with the company's patented agrochemicals. In the not-so-distant future, farmers may be planting seeds that will develop into productive (but sterile) crops only if sprayed with a carefully prescribed regimen that includes the company's proprietary pesticide, fertilizer or herbicide. The latest version of Monsanto's suicide seeds won't germinate unless exposed to a special chemical, while AstraZeneca's technologies outline how to engineer crops to become stunted or otherwise impaired if not regularly exposed to the company's chemicals.

Ignoring potential impacts on farmers around the world, the seed and agrochemical industry argues that engineered seed sterility is highly
beneficial to the environment because it will eliminate the problem of horizontal gene transfer -- it will prevent cross-pollination and thus the
escape of engineered genes from transgenic plants to nearby weeds or wild relatives. Suicide seeds could eliminate the possibility of genetic pollution and conveniently offers a "green" rationale for acceptance of genetic seed sterility. Industry also argues that they can't continue to develop new, more productive varieties for agriculture unless they get a fair return on their investment.

Seed sterility technology is unacceptable to growing numbers of civil society organizations worldwide who are calling for Terminator technologies to be banned by governments. Farmers, scientists, and others from over 50 countries have sent more than 1850 letters to the U.S. Department of Agriculture calling for an end to the Terminator. According to RAFI, the easiest way for other countries to ban Terminator is for national patent offices to reject these claims on the legal grounds of ordre public (against public morality).

A RAFI report "Traitor Technology" provides an in-depth analysis of the seed sterility patents. For this study and a detailed chart of patent claims, visit RAFI's homepage at www.rafi.org.

Source: RAFI Press Release - 27 January 1999

RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #638 .
. ---February 18, 1999--- .
. HEADLINES: .
. AGAINST THE GRAIN, PART 2 .
. ========== .
. Environmental Research Foundation .
. P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403 .
. Fax (410) 263-8944; E-mail: erf@rachel.org .
. ========== .
. All back issues are available by E-mail: send E-mail to .
. info@rachel.org with the single word HELP in the message. .
. Back issues are also available from http://www.rachel.org. .
. To start your own free subscription, send E-mail to .
. listserv@rachel.org with the words .
. SUBSCRIBE RACHEL-WEEKLY YOUR NAME in the message. .
=================================================================

AGAINST THE GRAIN, PART 2

The corporations that are introducing genetically modified crops into the global ecosystem want you to think of genetic engineering as a well-understood science similar to laparascopic surgery. Indeed, the phrase "genetic engineering" gives the impression that moving genes from one organism to another is as straightforward as designing a rocket or a TV set. This is not the case.

Basically, a plant's genome (all of its genes, taken together) is a black box. Genetic engineering takes a gene from one black box and forces it into a second black box (the recipient plant), hoping that the new gene will "take." Most of the time, the experiment fails.[1] Once in a few thousand tries, the foreign gene embeds itself in the recipient plant's genome and the newly-modified plant gains the desired trait. But that is all the technicians know. They have no idea where in the receiving plant's genome the new gene has found a home. This fundamental ignorance, combined with the speed and scale at which modified organisms are being released into the global ecosystem, raises a host of questions of safety for the future of agriculture, for the environment, and for human health.

** To begin with, genes don't necessarily control a single trait. A gene may control several different traits in a plant. Without careful study, plants with undesirable characteristics may be released into the global ecosystem. And biotechnology is not like a chemical spill that can be mopped up -- once you release a new gene sequence into nature, your grandchildren are going to be living with it because there's no taking it back.

** How a gene affects a plant depends upon the environment. The same gene can have different effects, depending on the environment in which the new plant is growing.[2] What appears predictable and safe after a few years of observation of a small test plot may turn out to have quite different consequences when introduced into millions of acres of croplands in the U.S. and elsewhere, where conditions vary widely.

** Does the new gene destabilize the entire plant genome in some unforeseen way, leading one day to problems in that crop? Only time will tell.

** Genes can travel to nearby, related plants on their own. This is called gene flow. In 1996 gene flow was discovered to be much more common that previously thought.[3]

According to SCIENCE magazine, many ecologists say it is only a matter of time before an engineered gene makes the leap to a weedy species, this creating a new weed or invigorating an old one. "It will probably happen in far less than 1% of the products," warns ecological geneticist Norm Ellstrand of the University of California at Riverside, "but within 10 years we will have a moderate-to-large scale ecological or economic
catastrophe, because there will be so many [genetically modified] products being released,"[3] Ellstrand predicts. It is worth noting that U.S. farmers already spend $4.3 billion purchasing 628 million pounds of herbicides (active ingredients only) to control weeds.[4,pg.32]

The Congressional Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) recommended that all genetically modified plants should be considered non-indigenous exotic species, with the power to disrupt ecosystems.[4,pg.29] Non-indigenous, introduced species have provided great benefits to humanity (most of U.S. agriculture relies on introduced species), but we also should learn from kudzu, purple loosestrife, the gypsy moth, the fire ant, and the boll weevil that exotic species can be extremely disruptive and very expensive to control (if indeed they can be controlled at all).

** A public health disaster was narrowly averted in 1996 when a group of researchers tried to improve soybeans by giving them a gene from the Brazil nut.[5] The goal was to improve the nutritional value of soybeans by forcing them to produce more methionine, an essential amino acid. The gene from the Brazil nut was successfully transferred to soybeans. After this had been accomplished, but before the soybeans were sold
commercially, independent researchers tested the soybeans to see if it would cause allergic reactions in people. Many people are allergic to nuts, particularly Brazil nuts. In some people, allergic reaction to Brazil nuts is swift and fatal.

A series of laboratory tests on humans confirmed that the genetically modified soybeans did provoke Brazil-nut allergy in humans. They could not feed the genetically modified soybeans to people for fear of killing them, but through scratch tests on skin, they confirmed unequivocally that people allergic to Brazil nuts were allergic to the modified soybeans. In discussing their findings in the NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF
MEDICINE, the researchers pointed out that tests on laboratory animals will not necessarily discover allergic reactions to genetically modified organisms. Only tests on humans will suffice.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) only requires testing for allergic reactions if a gene is being taken from a source that is already known to cause allergic reactions in humans. Many genes are being taken now from bacteria and other life-forms whose allergenicity is entirely unknown, so federal regulations require no allergy testing in these cases. This reduces regulatory costs for the corporations, but leaves the public unprotected.

** Crops are being genetically modified chiefly as a way to sell more pesticides. [See REHW #637.] In some cases, the modified crops change the pesticides themselves, giving them new toxicity. The herbicide bromoxynil falls into this category.[1,pg.41] Bromoxynil is already recognized by U.S. EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] as a possible carcinogen and as a teratogen (i.e., it causes birth defects). Calgene (now owned by Monsanto) developed a strain of cotton plants (called BXN Cotton) that can withstand direct spraying with bromoxynil. Unfortunately, the bromoxynil-resistant gene in cotton modifies the bromoxynil, turning it into a chemical byproduct called DBHA, which is at least as toxic as bromoxynil itself.

Although humans do not eat cotton, traditional silage for cattle contains up to 50% cotton slash, gin mill leavings, and cotton debris. Both bromoxynil and DBHA are fat-soluble, so they can accumulate in the fat of animals. Therefore, it is likely that DBHA will make its way into the human food chain through meat. Furthermore, cotton seed oil is widely used as a direct human food and as a cooking additive. In licensing bromoxynil for use
on Monsanto's genetically modified BXN Cotton, EPA conducted a risk assessment that assumed bromoxynil and DBHA had no way to
enter the human food chain. Lastly, cotton dust -- the cause of brown lung disease -- will now carry the added hazard of bromoxynil and DBHA, another danger that EPA has disregarded. Thus genetic engineering -- which is being promoted as a technology that will reduce the perils of pesticides -- will in some instances increase them.

In rats and in rabbits, bromoxynil causes serious birth defects, including changes in the bones of the spine and skull, and hydrocephaly ("water on the brain"). These birth defects appear in offspring at doses of bromoxynil that are not toxic to the mother. Despite these findings, and despite a law (the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996) that explicity gives EPA the power to reduce exposure standards to protect infants, EPA in
1997 declined to require a special safety factor to protect children from bromoxynil.

Lastly, when EPA added up the cancer-causing potential of bromoxynil, they found it to be 2.7 per million, and they promptly declared this to be "well within" the one-in-a-million regulatory limit.[1,pg.46] Is 2.7 less than one?

By all appearances, EPA is more interested in protecting Monsanto's investment in this new technology than in protecting public health.

** Because genetically-engineered soybeans will be doused with increased quantities of herbicides, such as Roundup (glyphosate), soybeans and soy products will carry increased chemical residues. Infants who must be reared on soy milk, because they cannot tolerate lactose in regular milk, will be at special hazard.

** Crops that are genetically modified to resist herbicides detoxify the herbicides by producing proteins, which will be incorporated into our food with unknown results.[1,pg.143]

** When crops are genetically modified to incorporate the naturally-occurring Bt toxin into their cells (see REHW #636), those Bt toxins will be incorporated into foods made from those crops. What will be the effect of these toxins and gene products on the bacteria and other organisms (the so-called microflora) that live in the human digestive tract? Time will tell.

** The "life sciences" companies have big plans for turning agricultural crops into "factories" for producing pharmaceuticals and specialty chemicals in open fields. They plan to manufacture vaccines, drugs, detergents, enzymes and other chemicals by putting the right genes into the right
plants.

The net effect of all this will be to expose soil insects and microorganisms, foraging and burrowing animals, seed-eating birds, and a myriad of other non-target organisms to these chemicals and to the gene products that make them. The Union of Concerned Scientists says, "Herbivores will consume the chemicals as they feed on plants. Soil microbes, insects, and worms will be exposed as they degrade plant debris. Aquatic
organisms will confront the drugs and chemicals washed into streams, lakes, and rivers from fields."[4,pg.6]

** Most fundamentally, genetically-engineered crops substitute human wisdom for the wisdom of nature. As genetically-engineered crops are planted on tens of millions of acres, the diversity of our agricultural systems is being further diminished. Do we know enough to select the "right" combination of genes to assure the stable, long-term yield of our agricultural systems? Our recent experiences with PCBs, CFCs, DDT, Agent Orange, and global warming should give us pause. Genetic engineering is by far the most powerful technology humans have ever discovered, and it is being deployed by the same corporations that, historically, have produced one large-scale calamity after another. Is there any good reason to think things will be different this time?

==========
[1] Marc Lappe and Britt Bailey, AGAINST THE GRAIN;
BIOTECHNOLOGY AND THE CORPORATE TAKEOVER OF YOUR FOOD [ISBN
1567511503] (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1998).
Available from Common Courage Press, P.O. Box 207, Monroe, ME
04951. Tel. (207) 525-0900 or (800) 497-3207.

[2] Craig Holdrege, GENETICS AND THE MANIPULATION OF LIFE: THE FORGOTTEN FACTOR OF CONTEXT (Hudson, N.Y.: Lindisfarne Press, 1996). ISBN 0-940262-77-0. Available from Lindisfarne Press, RR4 Box 94 A-1, Hudson, NY 12534.

[3] James Kling, "Could Transgenic Supercrops One Day Breed Superweeds?" SCIENCE Vol. 274 (October 11, 1996), pgs. 180-181.

[4] Jane Rissler and Margaret Mellon, THE ECOLOGICAL RISKS OF ENGINEERED CROPS (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1996).

[5] Julie A. Nordlee and others, "Identification of a Brazil-nut Allergen in Transgenic Soybeans," NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE Vol. 334, No. 11 (March 14, 1996), pgs. 688-692.

Descriptor terms: agriculture; biotechnology; genetic engineering; regulation; epa; food safety; food security; pesticides; bt; glyphosate; roundup; monsanto; bromoxynil; dbha; herbicides; allergens; bxn cotton; soybeans;

################################################################
NOTICE
Environmental Research Foundation provides this electronic version of RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY free of charge
even though it costs our organization considerable time and money to produce it. We would like to continue to provide this service free. You could help by making a tax-deductible contribution (anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send your tax-deductible contribution to: Environmental Research Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403-7036. Please do not send credit card information via E-mail. For further
information about making tax-deductible contributions to E.R.F. by credit card please phone us toll free at 1-888-2RACHEL, or at (410) 263-1584, or fax us at (410) 263-8944. --Peter Montague, Editor
################################################################

Britain extends altered crop ban

Friday, 19 February 1999 13:46 (GMT)

(UPI Focus)

LONDON, Feb. 19 (UPI) - After mounting public pressure all week, the British government has declared it will extend a ban against growing
genetically altered crops in Britain. The environment minister Thursday promised that the commercial growing of such altered foodstuffs would not be allowed in Britain until the government was convinced it did not harm the environment and wildlife.

Minister Michael Meacher noted the current ban - against the multi-national companies wanting to market the seeds - runs out in a year's time but he said that ban will be extended, until the government can prove the safety of the foodstuffs. He said: "Until we have clear scientific evidence about the impact on the environment we will continue to prevent the commercial planting of these crops as long as necessary. "He speculated that because public opinion had been so forceful on the issue he did not believe "genetic engineering companies would try toblock the government" in extending the ban. British Prime Minister Tony Blair's government, meanwhile, issued a statement saying that in history, many scientific discoveries have been greeted with irrational skepticism. But the statement promised every care would be taken to double check against any threat to health or the environment. Today, the announcement of the extended ban has provoked many environmental, consumer and health groups to issues statements welcoming the news.

The national adviser on GM (genetically modified) organisms to English Nature and other conservation bodies, Brian Johnson, said: "We are delighted. We have said all along it would take three years to conduct proper trials to see if wildlife suffers."

This morning, a spokesman for Monsanto, the major multinational company providing altered seeds and crops, softened the company's earlier stance. Dan Verakis said the company would not necessarily press ahead with commercial crops as soon as the current moratorium agreement ran out in spring 2000.

This contrasts with what Monsanto's senior European spokesman, Tom McDermott, told the BBC Thursday - that Monsanto would appeal to the
European Union if Britain tried to block its activities.
--
Copyright 1999 by United Press International
All rights reserved

Stop the crops
by George Monbiot
[George Monbiot was the first British journalist to draw attention to the hazards of genetic engineering in the national press.]
Guardian (London)Saturday February 13, 1999

The geneticist Dr Arpad Pusztai is a dangerous man. He has released into the environment a virulent self-replicating organism, which is already
running riot across Britain. It's called the truth. Yesterday, the Government moved rapidly to round it up and shove it back into the flask
from which it spilt.

Jack Cunningham, the government's pest control officer, told the Today programme that the public had nothing to fear from Dr Pusztai's revelation
that rats fed with genetically modified potatoes suffered damage to theirimmune systems and internal organs. Human health, he claimed, was the
Government's overwhelming priority. Genetic engineering had only been deployed experimentally in Britain so far. Europe was introducing rigorous
new labelling requirements for engineered foods. And no, English Nature had not called for a moratorium. The nation could breathe a sigh of
relief. The verminous truth was on the retreat.

But, like all dangerous pathogens, it has a nasty habit of cropping up again, just when you thought it was under control. It has even managed to
infect English Nature's website. The agency, the website says, will 'continue to recommend a moratorium on commercial releases'. In fact, it's
beginning to look as if the only place the bug has not re-infected is the well-guarded inner sanctum of the Government.

Dr Cunningham has used subtle tactics to shut it out. Yes, genetically engineered crops have only been deployed experimentally: in British
fields. But they have been deployed wholesale in British food. Most processed food now contains genetically modified products. Yes, there are new labelling requirements for engineered foods. But no, they are not rigorous. Thanks to lobbying by the British government, European regulations are now so weak as to be almost meaningless. The British delegation insisted that there need be no warning about the presence of food additives, refined oils and flavourings made from engineered plants. And no, Dr Cunningham, the British government has not put human health ahead of other priorities. Two weeks ago, it announced that it is giving A13 million to the biotechnology industry, to help improve its profile and win public confidence. Last summer, both Jack Cunningham and Jeff Rooker, the deputy agriculture minister, held meetings with Monsanto, the world's
most aggressive biotech company. The meetings were arranged by Monsanto's public relations consultants, Bell Pottinger. In October, Bell Pottinger was joined by Cathy McGlynn, previously Jack Cunningham's special adviser.

Monsanto's lobbying has been spectacularly successful. The Government's Invest in Britain Bureau now boasts that the UK 'leads the way in Europein ensuring that regulations and other measures affecting the developmentof biotechnology take full account of the concerns of business.'
Business concerns are also heeded elsewhere. Last summer, a part-timeemployee of Monsanto's called Bill Clinton telephoned Tony Blair to insist
that nothing be done to restrict the biotech sector's expansion in Britain. Monsanto was one of the largest donors of 'soft dollars' to Bill's 1996 presidential campaign.

It was these considerations which underlay Tony Blair's statement to theCommons last week. He told the House that imposing a moratorium on
engineered crops would increase rather than decrease public concern. Whathe meant, of course, was that it would be bad for the image of the
biotechnology companies.

The Government contends that genetically engineered crops will help both to feed the world and save the environment. But the world already produces 50 per cent more food than it needs. People go hungry not because there is too little food but because food and the land on which it grows are concentrated in the hands of the rich and powerful.

The biggest threat to future supplies is the environmental destruction caused by large-scale agro-industry: precisely the type of farming
facilitated by genetic engineering. The corporate control of the food chain that modification allows will ensure that even less of the world's
food reaches those who need it most. We are Dr Cunningham's guinea pigs, the subjects of a vast global experiment from which no good can come.
When Dr Pusztai told the truth, he was sacked from the government-funded institute for which he worked. Its director, Philip James, had given him
permission to speak to a television crew about his research. When the programme was broadcast, Professor James supported him. A day later, he
sacked him and made him sign a gagging order. The 22 eminent scientists who wrote a statement of support for Dr Pusztai this week are among
thousands who would like to know why Professor James changed his mind.

The row over genetic engineering has long been portrayed as a dispute between environmentalists and scientists. But many of the most persuasive
and cogent critics of this technology are themselves gene scientists, some among the foremost in their fields.

The environment cannot sustain genetically engineered crops. Science mistrusts them. The public doesn't want them. Isn't it time the Government
stopped forcing us to eat them, and fed us, instead, with the truth? We are Dr Cunningham's guinea pigs, subjects of an unwanted, vast global
experiment

GENETICALLY ENGINEERED CROPS TAKING OVER U.S. FIELDS

A new book by Marc Lappe and Britt Bailey, Against the Grain, details how genetic engineering is revolutionizing U.S. agriculture almost overnight,
according to a report in the February 11 issue of Environmental Research Foundation's Rachel Weekly. In 1997, 15 percent of the U.S. soybean crop was grown from genetically engineered seed. By next year, if Monsanto Corporation's timetable unfolds on schedule, 100 percent of the U.S. soybean crop (60 million acres) will be genetically engineered, Lappe and Bailey write. The same revolution is occurring, at the same pace, in cotton. Corn, potatoes, tomatoes and other food crops are lagging slightly behind. Three federal agencies regulate genetically-engineered crops and foods: the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The heads of all three are on record with speeches that support genetic engineering. All three agencies have policies that:

No public records need be kept of which farms are using genetically-engineered seeds

Companies that buy from farmers and sell to food manufacturers and grocery chains do not need to keep genetically-engineered crops separate from
traditional crops, so purchasers have no way to avoid purchasing genetically engineered foods

No labels indicating genetically engineered material is required for any crops, or food products, so consumers have no way to exercise informed
choice in the grocery store.

Processed Foods May Damage The Developing Brain
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 15:09:49 -0600
From: Bill Mee <bill.mee@lmco.com>
Organization: GDE

http://www.exnews.com

Processed Foods May Damage The Developing Brain
By Michael Goodspeed

June 29, 1999

During the second half of the twentieth century, there was an exponential increase in the number of chemical additives put in common food and beverage products Many respected researchers in the field of health and nutrition are wondering aloud if this has played a role in increased levels of violence and mental illness in American society, particularly among young people.

One of the most harmful food additives to the developing brain is MSG. For many years, Americans have been aware of the presence of MSG in most Chinese restaurant food. However, few people are cognizant of the fact that food labels which read "NO MSG" are frequently misleading, because companies have learned to cleverly disguise MSG by inventing new names to hide it under.

In his book Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills, Dr. Russell Blaylock explains the horrific effect that MSG and other chemicals called "excitotoxins" can have on the developing brains of young people:

"What if someone were to tell you that a chemical added to food could cause brain damage in your children, and that this chemical could effect how your children's nervous systems formed during development, so that in later years they may have learning or emotional difficulties? What if there was scientific evidence that these chemicals could permanently damage a critical part of the brain known to control hormones, so that later in life your child might have endocrine problems?...Would you also be upset to learn that many of the brain lesions caused by these products in your children are irreversible and can result from a SINGLE exposure of these products in sufficient concentration?"

Another so-called excitotoxin is aspartame (NutraSweet), and Dr. Blaylock, like many other health experts, says there is evidence "strongly suggesting that the artificial sweetener in your diet soft drink may cause brain tumors to develop, and that the number of brain tumors reported since the introduction of this artificial sweetener has risen dramatically." Many also believe that NutraSweet might play a role in youth violence, due
to the fact that it decreases serotonin levels in the brain.

Dr. Blaylock goes on to write, "How would you feel when you learn the food industry hides and disguises these excitotoxin additives (MSG and Aspartate) so they can't be recognized? Incredulous? Enraged? The fact is many foods are labeled as having "No MSG" but in fact not only contain MSG but also are laced with other excitotoxins of equal potency and danger."

Here is a list of food additives that, according to Dr. Blaylock, always contain MSG:

Monosodium Glutamate
Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein
Hydrolyzed Protein
Hydrolyzed Plant Protein
Plant Protein Extract
Sodium Caseinate
Calcium Caseinate
Yeast Extract
Textured Protein (Including TVP)
Autolyzed Yeast
Hydrolyzed Oat Flour
Corn Oil

These are additives which FREQUENTLY contain MSG:

Malt Extract
Malt Flavoring
Bouillon
Broth
Stock
Flavoring
Natural Flavors/Flavoring
Natural Beef Or Chicken Flavoring
Seasoning
Spices

And additives which may contain MSG:

Carrageenan
Enzymes
Soy Protein Concentrate
Soy Protein Isolate
Whey Protein Concentrate

Given the inordinate amount of processed food in the average American diet, these facts should cause great alarm in the minds of health-conscious individuals.

>From the day US children are born, they are fed a steady dosage of boxed, canned and packaged foods which contain many of the toxins listed above; kids' snacks and meals of TV dinners, candies, chips, ice creams and other desserts are frequently laced with MSG and other toxins. How many cases of teen depression and suicide, or a plethora of mental illnesses afflicting young people (anorexia, bulimia, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia) might be partly attributed to their diets? Just how prevalent were these problems before these products were put on the market?

Is it really a coincidence that many third world countries, struggling with the plights of famine and disease, still have fewer instances of mental illness in their young people? Is this because their diets consist so heavily of natural, holistic foods? Has anyone in the food industry OR the FDA taken the time to wonder what the causal factors might be behind the 20th century explosion of degenerative brain diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, Lou Gehrig's disease and ALS, not to mention teen violence and insanity? Why are no elected officials voicing suspicion about the FDA's handling of the NutraSweet controversy (namely the documented affiliation that many of their officials have with the MONSANTO Co.)? And has the impartiality of the mainstream news media been compromised by their dependence on massive advertising revenues generated by the suspects in this case? It is curious that these important questions have yet to be asked by a single member of the national press core.

A sober pessimism has enveloped many in the field of consumer advocacy. In a recent interview with ExNews, Mary Nash Stoddard, head of the Aspartame Consumer Safety Network, stated that her earlier mission - achieving an outright ban on chemicals like NutraSweet - has shifted to public education, so that consumers will be empowered to make informed health choices for themselves. Both researchers now call upon a concerned
public to share with family and friends the truth about the many dangers lurking on our supermarket shelves.

Activist Mailing List - http://get.to/activist


Subj: [aspartame] For Immediate Release: Problems with Coke ARE ASPARTAME (NUTRASWEET) SYMPTOMS! Includes other aspartame issues currently being discussed in mainstream media. Contact Betty Martini, Mission Possible International 770 242-2599
Date: 6/19/99 4:39:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: Mission-Possible-USA@altavista.net (Betty Martini)

From: Betty Martini <Mission-Possible-USA@altavista.net>

A Wall Street Journal article (6/11/99) stated that children were treated at a hospital in northern Belgium for symptoms including headaches, stomach aches and diarrhea after drinking Coke at school. The children told hospital officials that the Coke gave a burning sensation to the tongue.
Headache is #1 on the FDA report of 92 symptoms, diarrhea #7 and abdominal pain and cramps #5. The report is by most frequent occurrence and these symptoms are notorious. The burning tongue is caused by a combination of things, the wood alcohol converts to formaldehyde and then formic acid which burns the tongue. It is also caused by neuropathy triggered by aspartame. Diet drinks sat in 120 degree Arabian sun in the Persian Gulf
for as long as 8 weeks at a time and the troops drank them all day. At 86 degrees according to the protest of the National Soft Drink Association
(www.dorway.com) aspartame breaks down. ( It becomes a witches brew of toxins.) An experiment by Jennifer Cohen with Winston Laboratory in New Jersey analyzing Diet Coke in room temperature, in an incubator and in the fridge revealed that aspartame breaks down to formaldehyde and DKP (a brain tumor agent) EVEN IN THE FRIDGE. Report on www.dorway.com

Symptoms of aspartame are identical to symptoms of Desert Storm Syndrome and on 60 Minutes on this subject someone in the military admitted they were unable to understand why the troops complained of this "burning tongue". A recent study on aspartame in Barcelona showed formaldehyde accumulates in the cells and damages DNA with 50% toxicity in the liver and substantial amounts in the kidneys, adipose tissue, retina and brain. A recent Reuters article detailed that Desert Storm Syndrome had to do with the genes. This genetic change reported in this study further implicates aspartame in this Syndrome. Those in the states were told not to send anything to the troops with sugar. For a map of DORway and the FDA report of 92 symptoms email help@dorway.com with nothing in message text or subject line.

The burning tongue issue is notorious with aspartame and is constantly discussed on the support groups on line for victims of Aspartame Disease,
the Aspartame One List and Aspartame Survivors International. Neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock, M.D., in a lecture on www.dorway.com says the reactions to aspartame are not allergic but toxic in nature like arsenic and cyanide. We're talking about a chemical poison. H. J. Roberts, M.D., has now declared Aspartame Disease to be a world epidemic and is in the process of publishing a medical text on the plague.

Ermelle Martinez, Mission Possible Los Angeles, and a science teacher, reported that a student having a reaction to Coke called the company asking if aspartame was also in regular Coke. She was asked what city and zip code she was calling from. When the student said L.A. Coke hung up on her. This is very troublesome amid rumors that aspartame is being mixed with sugar and is being added to regular drinks. It is already in Tab and
Fresca. Aspartame is not a diet product but a drug that makes you crave carbohydrates. See protest of NSDA. It also interacts with other drugs
and changes brain chemistry.

Industry and trade organizations are battling back on the aspartame issue because of an email that made world news having to do with a World
Environmental Conference and a spokeswoman for the EPA mentioning an epidemic of MS and Lupus. Nancy Markle had actually picked up a post I had written and published it under her name, where I said: "I'm here to lecture on MS and lupus and identify the toxin as NutraSweet." You can see the industry influence when reporters mention a study on headaches at Duke, sometimes used to show an independent study. It was actually done in the Searle Center (original manufacturer - Monsanto bought them in l985), and funded by Monsanto. Russell Blaylock, M.D., explains in an interview on Mission Possible Radio (audio and transcript on www.dorway.com) how studies are fixed. He is the author of Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills ( 1 800 - 643-2665). Further Ralph Walton, M.D., discussed on 60 Minutes in Dec, l996 that research into peer reviewed studies showed that almost 100% of independent studies not funded by industry show problems with aspartame. This research is now on www.dorway.com This 60 Minutes presentation was when famed researcher Dr. John Olney who founded the field of neuroscience known as excitotoxicity made world news over the aspartame/brain tumor issue.

Today to confirm the information in the Nancy Markle post all one has to do is go to http://www.dorway.com/nomarkle.html There is even information on why the EPA did not tell the truth on the World Environmental Conference as well as the above mentioned Barcelona study. Aspartame destroys the central nervous system and mimics MS, and posted is Dr. H. J. Roberts position paper MS or Aspartame Disease. With regard to lupus aspartame turns your immune system against your body. The formaldehyde embalms the proteins and makes them strange to the immune system. The immune system attacks your own body because it has your own denatured proteins as an antigen. This then generates the false information fed into the immune system that your own proteins are to be attacked. Than any other insults, mental, physical or immunological can stimulate the immune Attack -

 LUPUS!
It is sickening that some media influenced by industry is still trying to play this down as a hoax. Some had even been on the www.dorway.com web
site prior to publishing. A post from World famous toxicologist Dr. George Schwartz tells the NutraSweet team what he thinks of their propaganda, and a journal by Dr. Woodrow Monte sets the matter straight on Monsanto's misinformation on the aspartame methanol issue. This is no hoax - it is
the Crime of the Century! On June 7 the Wall Street Journal also played down the aspartame issue. Marilyn Chase who wrote the issue still has not
retracted the comments even though she was given the web site with confirmation and WSJ received a letter directly from Dr. H. J. Roberts. The
two support groups on line were set up from calls coming in from all over the world from the victims. They have stopped the assault and symptoms
continue to disappear.

To fuel this issue further, breast implant patients have also reported MS and lupus, and Dr. Roberts has just released a book on Aspartame Disease in Breast Implant patients discussing whether systemic symptoms reported were really due to Aspartame Disease. ( 1 800 - 814-9800 ).

On 5/15/99 a CBS News Report discussed 34 children who became ill from Bazooka gum found in a school yard. The symptoms were the same headaches and stomach aches as reported with Coke and Bazooka contains aspartame. They were written to years ago but refuse to remove it or answer correspondence. It is particularly serious in gum because aspartame is a drug with small molecules, works like nitroglycerin, goes through saliva straight to the brain. Some have had a grand mal seizure on one piece of sugarfree gum.

Monsanto must be coming under extreme pressure. They have just hired the former acting FDA Commissioner, Dr. Michael Friedman to their Searle office, div of Monsanto. Dr. Friedman has been receiving from Mission Possible the aspartame complaints for years. He has never responded to an email, and the FDA continues to refuse to answer 26 questions on aspartame given to them by former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich. FDA and Monsanto can now remove the revolving door and build a bridge to take care of the traffic. FDA remains Monsanto's Washington Branch office! Its time to set the matter straight. Monsanto, FDA, Coke and Pepsi must take responsibility for this plague of Aspartame Disease. With operations of Mission Possible all over the US and many countries warning all consumers off this neurotoxin the coverup has been exposed. www.dorway.com contains even the Bressler Report, the FDA's own audit of the horrors that were triggered by aspartame on original studies including brain tumors to atrophied testes and grand mal seizures. The damning CDC investigation is also listed.

*****************************************************************************
1. Take the 60-day No Aspartame Test and send us your case history.
Mission Possible International
5950-H State Bridge Rd.  #215 Duluth, GA 30097  USA
2. Tell your doctor and all of your friends!
3. Return Asparcidal food to the store.
(anything with Monsanto's NutraSweet/Equal/Spoonful/Benevia/NatraTaste)
VISIT http://www.dorway.com Get links to over 30 sites on aspartame
VISIT http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/   ..FAQs & Cases
VISIT http://presidiotex.com/aspartame - survivor's web pages
VISIT http://www.notmilk.com Exposing Bovine Growth Hormone
Disability and Death are not acceptable costs of business!

From: Strange Haze
To: chemical-trails@egroups.com
Cc: Private Private ; Clifford Carnicom ; Will Thomas
Sent: Monday, May 03, 1999 5:31 PM
Subject: [chemical-trails] Visitors to STRANGE HAZE

FYI --

I just began keeping detailed server-statistics for my STRANGE HAZE website (beyond a simple counter).

Today was the first business-day I've tracked which domains my visitors are originating from -- and for the moment, I'll just pass this along to you
guys, no web-posting. It was an eye-opener for me to say the least.

Interesting visitors for MAY 3 only:

-T.R.W. - 2 visits (aren't they into all kinds of "black budget" Pentagon stuff?)

-Environmental Protection Agency (Pennyslvania)

-US Department of Agriculture (2 visits today)

-US Census Bureau

-US Veterans Administration (2 visits)

-Univ. of Pennyslvania Cardiology Dept.

-Virginia Beach General Hospital

-Martin County, Florida Board of County Commissioners

-American Meter Co. (they make some kind of fancy-looking "tracing" equipment. Weird thing is, their website only shows photos of the stuff, no
descriptions on what it does. Curious.) Visit them at http://www.amcowv.com

-Eaton, Inc. Some kind of high-tech company that makes all sorts of stuff, from environmental testing to electro-magnetic laboratories.
http://www.eaton.com

-Visioneering Research, Inc. - their site says they "deliver image-based solutions in nuclear safeguards, DNA sequencing, artifact classification,
aerial monitoring...and space-debris detection."

-Monsanto, Inc. - involved in health/pharmaceuticals

-Roche, Inc. - involved in pharmaceuticals

-DuPont Pharmaceuticals

-Medtronic, Inc. - medical and health

-Boeing Aerospace (5 visits today)

-Rockwell Collins Aerospace

-Allegheny Teledyne - aerospace and defense

-Lockheed Martin Aerospace(4 visits today)

-Honeywell (Aviation division)

-Sundstrand Aerospace (2 visits today)

-Bastian Material Handling, a high-tech "systems integrator" (?) at http://www.bmhcorp.com

-Idaho National Engineering & Environmental Laboratory at http://www.inel.gov Heavily into environmental technology, working with Lockheed. They make "ionmeters" for the detection of chemical and biological agents among other things. They appear to be heavily into that business.

All this from one day.

And I know from Cliff Carnicom's website, that the aerospace companies have been repeat visitors to contrails websites for months now on a continuing basis. Those folks ought to know a thing or two about contrails. The fact that they keep coming back again and again means they don't doubt the validity of our claim. Why waste their time otherwise?

That's got to be a mighty big chunk of our military/industrial complex right there, no?

strangehaze@msn.com
http://strangehaze.freeservers.com/index.html

>>



 

--