Dr. Gina's Blog

Genetically modified organisms (GMO), herbicide-resistant crops, and genetically modified growth hormone (such as rBGH ) pose dangers to our health, our environment and our world–caused by the biotech industry’s imposition on our food chain. I am reminded of an interesting discussion that I had with a prominent researcher at the University of Illinois, whose team of scientists is looking at the effects of broccoli (genetically modified) on liver detoxification enzymes. She is passionate about her work, and the data they are accumulating is intriguing. However, when asked how she felt about the use of GMOs for treating health challenges, when we have research to demonstrate that this same technology damages human health, she responded that at the very least, her genetically engineered broccoli seeds could “help to stop world hunger.”I hear and read about this argument, championed by the biotech industry, frequently–that biotech GMO crops will feed the hungry around the world and will help meet the needs of our growing population. My comment to this is, for the first time ever, our world houses just as many overweight people (1.1 billion) as it does hungry souls. Moreover, hunger experts have demonstrated that countries such as Zambia have pulled themselves out of food crises without the help of genetically engineered seeds and crops. Interestingly, the Bush Administration, backed by fervent support from the biotech industry, challenged the World Trade Organization (WTO) on current European policies that limit the import of GE seeds and foods into the European Union, couching their position as a moral crusade, in part to counter hunger in Africa. However, according to Amadou Kanoute, regional director for Consumers International Office for Africa (CI-ROAF) in Zimbabwe, and Dr. Drinah Nyirenda, executive director of the Program Against Malnutrition (PAM) in Zambia, there is no longer a food crisis in Zambia, the only African country that refused GMO food aid. Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch, summarized the underlying motivation behind the US “fight against hunger.” The Bush administration has sought to link Europe’s food policies with starvation in Africa to justify its WTO case against Europe, which is in fact, really about trying to overcome the growing public antipathy to GMOs worldwide and the related disappointment for US industries who gambled on this technology.

Genetically engineered herbicide-resistant seeds are patented, requiring that farmers either purchase new seeds every year, or pay an annual licensing fee. Such requirements are destructive to the ways in which the majority of African farmers currently maintain their farms. Additionally, we know that the increased use of GE herbicide-resistant crops necessitates an increase in the use of environmental chemicals that harm human health. Not to mention the unknown health effects of ingesting GE crops. Grains such as corn comprise nearly 70% of the average African’s daily caloric intake, as compared to less than 5% of the daily caloric intake of the average American, putting the African population at greater risk of realizing the known and unknown health hazards associated with GE crop production and consumption.

Seventy-five percent of the soybean crop planted in this country last year was Roundup Ready, as was 65% of the cotton and 10 percent of the corn. Perhaps the “fight for hunger” position, championed by the biotech industry, has more to do with money–farmers must purchase a patent-protected herbicide (e.g. Monsanto’s Roundup) from the same company that sells the GE herbicide-resistant product (Monsanto’s GE soy)–and politics, than with the ethical motivation to be socially responsible.

Unfortunately, researchers, most of whom work for the biotech industry, predict that the increased use of herbicides to kill weeds, that is occurring as a result of planting herbicide-resistant crops, will breed highly resistant, super-weeds. This will inevitably require that farmers utilize doubly potent chemicals to maintain their crops, exposing humans to greater degrees of toxic chemical exposure and an unforeseen impact on the incidence and onset of serious health challenges.

References:

Kanoute A. and Nyirenda D. African groups condemn Bush administration’s WTO challenge of European GMO policies; GMOs not answer to African hunger. Public Citizen Press Release June 18, 2003.

MacArthur M. Triple-resistant canola weeds found in Alberta. Western Producer Feb 10; 2000.

Hardell L. and Erickson M. A case-control study of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and exposure to pesticides. Cancer 876(6), 1999.

Silva E, Rajapakse N, Kortenkamp A. Something from “nothing” eight weak estrogenic chemicals combined at concentrations below NOECs produce significant mixture effects. 2002. Environ Sci Technol Apr 15;36(8):1751-6.

Watching a major news channel earlier this morning I was shocked when the medical correspondent was discussing pharmaceuticals showing up in our water supply. You can read about this issue in this previous blog post. The “medical expert” went on to explain that the frequency by which we are exposed to toxins from drugs in our water supply is an important factor- so even if there is only a trace amount found in each cup (or bottle) you drink, the fact that you drink many cups per day, for years on end- is what is concerning research scientists. THEN…pause…DEEP BREATH..the news correspondent went on to ask the “medical expert” if there was any truth to all the information out there about ways to detoxify the body from such chemicals and the “expert” smirked and said “no…not at all.”

Considering that nearly every cell in the human body has innate detoxification mechanisms in place to remove toxins from the body, paired with the fact that specific medicinal herbs and nutrients are clinically shown to enhance the effects of those mechanisms, there is more than ample justification for employing a safe and well designed, clinically proven detoxification program to assist the body in removing environmental toxins that it is not well equipped to handle. Beyond that are hundreds of thousands of medical records demonstrating the clinical efficacy of employing a sound detoxification program to remove environmental toxins from the body to prevent and treat disease. Keep in mind that our exposure to environmental toxins has increased exponentially over the last century and the body HAS NOT evolved to the point of being able to keep up with this sudden increase in exposure. The consequence of not supporting our body’s innate detoxification mechanisms is DNA damage and an increase of preventable disease.