Beware of the dangers of soy

(NaturalNews) Soy. It is found in seemingly every prepared and processed food item available on the market. Whether it is soy protein, soybean oil, or soy lecithin, soy derivatives have become an almost universal additive in American food products. Commonly thought to be a healthy, protein-dense food, the soybean has been touted as a wonder victual capable of feeding the planet and stopping world hunger. Truth is, unfermented soy is one of the most harmful, toxic substances to ever become so predominant in the food chain.

The History of Soy
Historically, ancient farmers planted soybeans in order to infuse their soil with nutrients such as nitrogen; their food crops benefited from the enriched soil that the soy plants provided. Typically attributed with Asian diets, soy has always played a minor role in eastern fare and, when consumed, it is done so fermented from a whole bean.

The traditional Japanese diet, for instance, includes over 100 biologically-unique foods per week with soy products accounting for only a few items. In Pearl Buck's 1931 bestselling Pulitzer Prize-winning novel, The Good Earth, she writes of Wang Lung, a Chinese subsistence farmer who rises to power in pre-revolutionary China because of he and his wife's hard work and determination . Raised in China herself, Buck's story contains scant mention of soy consumption as part of the typical Chinese diet.

Ancient pictographs from the Chinese Chou Dynasty period also confirm that soy was traditionally not used as food but as a crop-rotating plant that served to replenish the planting soil with nutrients. Throughout the centuries, it gradually gained popularity in various fermented forms.

Only in recent decades has corporate soy production become commonplace, ushered in by gales of misinformation claiming it as a health food in all its processed forms. Even in Asian countries, 90% of soy consumption involves processed, unfermented soy products much like the ones consumed in America.

What's So Bad About Soy?
Soybeans naturally contain a host of anti-nutrients and toxins, including trypsin inhibitors, hemaglutinin, phytic acid, and phytoestrogens.

The potent trypsin inhibitors present in soy significantly curtail protein absorption, causing abdominal distress due to hampered absorption of crucial nutrients and amino acids. Animals fed diets that contained large amounts of trypsin inhibitors developed pancreatic problems including cancer.

Hemaglutinin is a substance that is responsible for causing red blood cells to clump together and form clots. Both trypsin inhibitors and hemaglutinin have been deemed "growth depressant substances" for their contributions in stunting essential bodily functions.

Phytic acid, or phytates, is another nutrient absorption inhibitor that deters the uptake of essential minerals such as calcium, magnesium, iron, and zinc. Present in the bran of seeds, phytic acid will offset the intake of nutrients by stopping their absorption within the intestinal track, leading to severe mineral deficiencies. Zinc, the "intelligence mineral", is the one most completely blocked by soy phytates. Soy has also been shown to have the highest phytic acid content of any other grain or legume ever studied.

Phytoestrogens are chemical compounds found in some plants that mimic the estrogen hormone. Soy products are particularly rich in isoflavone phytoestrogens which are capable of significantly disrupting human hormonal balance, particularly in men. A study conducted by Harvard University revealed a definitive correlation between soy consumption and low sperm counts in men, indicating that high soy consumption can instigate reproductive harm and suppress testosterone levels.

Genetic Engineering
To add insult to injury, the GMO Compass database records that as of 2008, 92% of soy crops in the U.S. are genetically modified varieties. GMOs are continually shown in independent studies to cause serious harm in the human body, a frightening prospect when considering that soy derivatives are found in virtually every processed food product.

One of the most prevalent culprits is soy lecithin, an emulsifier that is added to processed foods to stabilize the ingredients with one another. Soybean oil is another popular additive found in all kinds of foods from mayonnaise and salad dressings to cakes and breads. Besides the fact that they are soy-based and highly prevalent, these ingredients are most often derived from GMO soybeans.

Even organic products may contain GMO soy lecithin since this particular ingredient falls outside the realm of organic requirements, a controversial loophole that many have taken charge to have changed. Most organic products specify non-GMO soy lecithin but it is always important to investigate and verify.

Eat Soy Sparingly, and Only Organic
The proper way to eat soy is whole, organic, fermented, and sparingly. Soy milk, tofu, soy nuts, and other popular food items are essentially toxic due to the inherent toxic properties of unfermented soy. Many of these products are also highly processed and genetically-modified.

Soy formulas are inadequate and potentially dangerous for babies as they do not contain the vibrant array of vital nutrients found in the mother's breast milk. Many doctors affirm that soy formulas lack essential fatty acids (EFAs), cholesterol, immunoglobulins, and other nutrients necessary for proper cognitive and neural development in the child. As it turns out, many babies are allergic to the highly-processed proteins and ingredients in infant formula.

For adults, soy products like miso, tamari, and shoyu that have been properly fermented are not only delicious but healthy when used in various food preparations. Fermentation eliminates virtually all of the anti-nutrients and toxins present in raw soybeans. Tempeh is another whole fermented soy food that is high in protein and dietary fiber, making it a pertinent vegetarian meal option.

Small amounts of fermented, organic soy foods in conjunction with a diverse, whole foods diet will serve the body well. Rather than consume inordinate amounts of chemically-processed soy as is becoming typical in the American diet, particularly among vegetarians, soy should be shrouded among an array of complete food items - preferably as a condiment and always fermented.

Sources:

Deville, Nancy. Death by Supermarket: The Fattening, Dumbing Down, and Poisoning of America. Fort Lee, NJ: Barricade Books, 2007. 83-108.

The Ploy of Soy - The Weston A. Price Foundation

The Effects of Antenatal Exposure to Phytoestrogens on Human Male Reproductive and Urogenital Development - The Weston A. Price Foundation

Harvard study: Soy sinks sperm count - WorldNetDaily

Soybean - GMO Database

Warning on GM food!

Doctors Warn Avoid Genetically Modified Food

By Jeffrey M. Smith
7-22-9

The American Academy of Environmental Medicine states,"Genetically Modified foods have not been properly tested and pose a serious health risk. There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation."

Last May the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) called on "Physicians to educate their patients, the medical community, and the public to avoid GM (genetically modified) foods when possible and provide educational materials concerning GM foods and health risks." They called for a moratorium on GM foods, long-term independent studies, and labeling.

AAEM's position paper stated, "Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food," including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system. They conclude, "There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation," as defined by recognized scientific criteria. "The strength of association and consistency between GM foods and disease is confirmed in several animal studies."

More and more doctors are already prescribing GM-free diets. Dr. Amy Dean, a Michigan internal medicine specialist, and board member of AAEM says, "I strongly recommend patients eat strictly non-genetically modified foods." Ohio allergist Dr. John Boyles says "I used to test for soy allergies all the time, but now that soy is genetically engineered, it is so dangerous that I tell people never to eat it."

Dr. Jennifer Armstrong, President of AAEM, says, "Physicians are probably seeing the effects in their patients, but need to know how to ask the right questions." World renowned biologist Pushpa M. Bhargava goes one step further. After reviewing more than 600 scientific journals, he concludes that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are a major contributor to the sharply deteriorating health of Americans.

Among the population, biologist David Schubert of the Salk Institute warns that "children are the most likely to be adversely effected by toxins and other dietary problems" related to GM foods. He says without adequate studies, the children become "the experimental animals."

The experience of actual GM-fed experimental animals is scary. When GM soy was fed to female rats, most of their babies died within three weeks-compared to a 10% death rate among the control group fed natural soy. The GM-fed babies were also smaller, and later had problems getting pregnant.

When male rats were fed GM soy, their testicles actually changed color-from the normal pink to dark blue. Mice fed GM soy had altered young sperm. Even the embryos of GM fed parent mice had significant changes in their DNA. Mice fed GM corn in an Austrian government study had fewer babies, which were also smaller than normal.

Reproductive problems also plague livestock. Investi-gations in the state of Haryana, India revealed that most buffalo that ate GM cottonseed had complications such as premature deliveries, abortions, infertility, and prolapsed uteruses. Many calves died. In the US, about two dozen farmers reported thousands of pigs became sterile after consuming certain GM corn varieties. Some had false pregnancies; others gave birth to bags of water. Cows and bulls also became infertile when fed the same corn.

Food Designed to Produce Toxins

GM corn and cotton are engineered to produce their own built-in pesticide in every cell. When bugs bite the plant, the poison splits open their stomach and kills them. Biotech companies claim that the pesticide, called Bt (produced from soil bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis) has a history of safe use, since organic farmers and others use Bt bacteria spray for natural insect control.

The Bt-toxin produced in GM plants, however, is thousands of times more concentrated than natural Bt spray, is designed to be more toxic, has properties of an allergen, and unlike the spray, cannot be washed off the plant.

Moreover, studies confirm that even the less toxic natural bacterial spray is harmful. When dispersed by plane to kill gypsy moths in the Pacific Northwest, about 500 people reported allergy or flu-like symptoms. Some had to go to the emergency room. The exact same symptoms are now being reported by farm workers throughout India who have handled Bt cotton. In 2008, based on medical records, the Sunday India reported, "Victims of itching have increased massively this year related to BT cotton farming."

American Academy of Environmental Medicine states, "Multiple animal studies show significant immune dysregulation," in-cluding increase in cytokines, which are "associated with asthma, allergy, and inflammation"-all on the rise in the US.

According to GM food safety expert Dr. Arpad Pusztai, changes in the immune status of GM animals are "a consistent feature of all the studies." Even Monsanto's own research showed significant immune system changes in rats fed Bt corn. A November 2008 study by the Italian government also found that mice have an immune reaction to Bt corn.

GM soy and corn each contain two new proteins with allergenic properties, GM soy has up to seven times more trypsin inhibitor-a known soy allergen-and skin prick tests show some people react to GM, but not to non-GM soy. Soon after GM soy was introduced to the UK, soy allergies skyrocketed by 50%. Perhaps the US epidemic of food allergies and asthma is a casualty of genetic manipulation.

In India, animals graze on cotton plants after harvest. But when shepherds let sheep graze on Bt cotton plants, thousands died. Post mortems showed severe irritation and black patches in both intestines and liver (as well as enlarged bile ducts). Investigators said preliminary evidence "strongly suggests that the sheep mortality was due to a toxin most probably Bt-toxin." In a small follow-up feeding study by the Deccan Development Society, all sheep fed Bt cotton plants died within 30 days; those that grazed on natural cotton plants remained healthy.

In a small village in Andhra Pradesh, buffalo grazed on cotton plants for eight years without incident. On January 3rd, 2008, the buffalo grazed on Bt cotton plants for the first time. All 13 were sick the next day; all died within 3 days. Bt corn was also implicated in the deaths of cows in Germany, and horses, water buffaloes, and chickens in the Philippines.

In lab studies, twice the number of chickens fed Liberty Link corn died; 7 of 20 rats fed a GM tomato developed bleeding stomachs; another 7 of 40 died within two weeks. Monsanto's own study showed evidence of poisoning in major organs of rats fed Bt corn, according to top French toxicologist G. E. Seralini.

Worst Finding of All-GMOs Remain Inside Us

The only published human feeding study revealed what may be the most dangerous problem from GM foods. The gene inserted into GM soy transfers into the DNA of bacteria living inside our intestines and continues to function. This means that long after we stop eating GMOs, we may still have potentially harmful GM proteins produced continuously inside of us. Put more plainly, eating a corn chip produced from Bt corn might transform our intestinal bacteria into living pesticide factories, possibly for the rest of our lives.

When evidence of gene transfer is reported at medical conferences around the US, doctors often respond by citing the huge increase of gastrointestinal problems among their patients over the last decade. GM foods might be colonizing the gut flora of North Americans.

Scientists at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had warned about all these problems even in the early 1990s. According to documents released from a lawsuit, the scientific consensus at the agency was that GM foods were inherently dangerous, and might create hard-to-detect allergies, poisons, gene transfer to gut bacteria, new diseases, and nutritional problems. They urged their superiors to require rigorous long-term tests. But the White House had ordered the agency to promote biotechnology and the FDA responded by recruiting Michael Taylor, Monsanto's former attorney, to head up the formation of GMO policy. That policy, which is in effect today, denies knowledge of scientists' concerns and declares that no safety studies on GMOs are required. It is up to Monsanto and the other biotech companies to determine if their foods are safe. Mr. Taylor later became Monsanto's vice president.

American Academy of Environmental Medicine states, "GM foods have not been properly tested" and "pose a serious health risk." Not a single human clinical trial on GMOs has been published. A 2007 review of published scientific literature on the "potential toxic effects/health risks of GM plants" revealed "that experimental data are very scarce." The author concludes his review by asking, "Where is the scientific evidence showing that GM plants/food are toxicologically safe, as assumed by the biotechnology companies?"

Famed Canadian geneticist David Suzuki answers, "The experiments simply haven't been done and we now have become the guinea pigs." He adds, "Anyone that says, 'Oh, we know that this is perfectly safe,' I say is either unbelievably stupid or deliberately lying."

Dr. Schubert points out, "If there are problems, we will probably never know because the cause will not be traceable and many diseases take a very long time to develop." If GMOs happen to cause immediate and acute symptoms with a unique signature, perhaps then we might have a chance to trace the cause.

This is precisely what happened during a US epidemic in the late 1980s. The disease was fast acting, deadly, and caused a unique measurable change in the blood-but it still took more than four years to identify that an epidemic was even occurring. By then it had killed about 100 Americans and caused 5,000-10,000 people to fall sick or become permanently disabled. It was caused by a genetically engineered brand of a food supplement called L-tryptophan.

If other GM foods are contributing to the rise of autism, obesity, diabetes, asthma, cancer, heart disease, allergies, reproductive problems, or any other common health problem now plaguing Americans, we may never know. In fact, since animals fed GMOs had such a wide variety of problems, susceptible people may react to GM food with multiple symptoms. It is therefore telling that in the first nine years after the large scale introduction of GM crops in 1996, the incidence of people with three or more chronic diseases nearly doubled, from 7% to 13%.

To help identify if GMOs are causing harm, the AAEM asks their "members, the medical community, and the independent scientific community to gather case studies potentially related to GM food consumption and health effects, begin epidemiological research to investigate the role of GM foods on human health, and conduct safe methods of determining the effect of GM foods on human health."

Citizens need not wait for the results before taking the doctors advice to avoid GM foods. People can stay away from anything with soy or corn derivatives, cottonseed and canola oil, and sugar from GM sugar beets-unless it says organic or "non-GMO."

If even a small percentage of people choose non-GMO brands, the food industry will likely respond as they did in Europe-by removing all GM ingredients. Thus, American Academy of Environmental Medicine's non-GMO prescription may be a watershed for the US food supply.

Jeffrey M. Smith, Executive Director of the Institute for Responsible Technology, is the leading spokesperson on the health dangers of GMOs. His first book, Seeds of Deception is the world's bestselling book on the subject. His second, Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, identifies 65 risks of GMOs and demonstrates how superficial government approvals are not competent to find most of them. He invited the biotech industry to respond in writing with evidence to counter each risk, but correctly predicted that they would refuse, since they don't have the data to show that their products are safe. Spilling the Beans, the institute's monthly column, is available at www.reliabletechnology.org. The website also offers eater-friendly tips for avoiding GMOs at home and in restaurants. Contact American Academy of Environmental Medicine at (734) 213-4901; environmentalmed@yahoo.com; www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html.

http://www.sentienttimes.com/09/June_July_09/doctors.html

GM products are unhealthy

(NaturalNews) The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) has issued a warning urging the public to avoid genetically modified foods and has also called for a moratorium on GMOs until long-term, independent studies can prove their safety. The group has also called for required labeling of foods that contain GMOs, a move that has been strongly opposed by the Food and Drug Administration and Big Biotech which cooperatively purport that consumers should not have the right to know whether or not the foods they buy come from traditionally bred or genetically engineered sources.

While urging for more independent studies, the AAEM paper cites its own studies alleging that genetically modified foods cause serious adverse health effects, emphasizing more than a mere "causal association" as is commonly assumed. These effects include rapid aging, severe alterations to the major bodily organs, infertility, immune problems, gastrointestinal dysfunction, and disruption to proper insulin regulation, among others.

Many doctors are warning their patients to avoid GMOs as well, recognizing the distinct correlation between GMOs and disease. Ohio allergist Dr. John Boyles believes genetically engineered foods are so dangerous that people should never eat them. Biologist Pushpa M. Bhargava, following the review of more than 600 scientific journals, has concluded that the drastic deterioration of Americans' health in recent years can be attributed to GMOs being introduced into their diets.

Experimental studies of genetically engineered foods and their effects in the body are disturbing, to say the least. Biologist David Schubert of the Salk Institute has stated that children are the most likely people to experience the adverse effects of GMOs, noting that apart from adequate safety studies, children become "the experimental animals". In truth, every citizen is a guinea pig when genetically altered organisms are introduced into the food supply without adequate safety studies let alone honest labeling.

In the animal studies that have been conducted, some noteworthy findings have been discovered about GMOs:
Female rats fed genetically modified soy saw most of their babies die within three weeks compared to the 10% death rate experienced by rats fed natural soy. The babies that survived in the genetically modified-fed control group were also born smaller and had problems getting pregnant later on.
Male rats fed genetically modified soy experienced a change in testicular color from pink to dark blue, as well as altered young sperm and significant changes in their DNA.
Indian buffalo that consumed genetically modified cottonseed experienced various birthing complications including infertility, abortions, premature delivery, and prolapsed uteruses. Many of the calves that survived birth died shortly thereafter.
In the United States, about 24 farmers reported that their pigs became sterile after consuming genetically modified corn.
Genetically modified corn and cotton, purposely engineered to create their own built-in pesticide called Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis), have been indicted in several studies to provoke intense allergic and immune reactions and death. Since the levels of Bt produced in the plant represent thousands of times more a concentration of Bt than natural Bt spray, the effects are greatly amplified. Shepherds whose sheep grazed on Bt cotton after harvest witnessed thousands of their sheep die. Post mortem examinations revealed severe irritation and black patches in the intestines and liver, as well as enlarged bile ducts. All sheep fed the Bt cotton eventually died within 30 days while those that grazed on natural cotton remained healthy.
Bt corn was also responsible for the deaths of cows, horses, water buffaloes, and chicken in both Germany and the Philippines.
Genetically modified tomatoes fed to rats were shown to cause bleeding stomachs and eventually killed many of the rats.

These are just a few examples of the many catastrophic effects of using genetically modified organisms as food.

Probably the worst finding in the AAEM report is the fact that GMOs can live and reproduce in the intestinal flora of the body long after being eaten. The genes present in the genetically modified organisms transfer into the DNA of intestinal bacteria, the good bacteria that digests food and maintains bodily health. This reprogramming can cause the intestinal flora to begin reproducing Bt pesticides, for example, rather than producing the living bacteria it is supposed to. The permanent, deadly implications of these alterations are mind boggling since intestinal flora is crucial for life.

Despite consensus from most FDA scientists in the early '90s declaring that genetically modified foods are inherently dangerous and could lead to all sorts of serious health problems, politics won out as mandates were given from Washington to promote biotechnology and GMOs in spite of apparent and obvious dangers. This led to the promotion of Michael Taylor, former attorney for Monsanto, as head of GMO policy at the FDA, a move that led to the official denial by the agency of any knowledge or substantiated concern by any FDA scientists about the safety of GMOs.

Despite findings in some 44,000 pages of internal FDA memos and reports released in 1999 due to a lawsuit, findings that contained the warnings from then scientists about the "unintended negative side effects" of genetic engineering, official FDA GMO policy has been scrubbed clean of the truth and purports blatant lies in its defense of GMOs as safe. In fact, current policy emphatically states that no safety studies on GMOs are even required or necessary; it is instead up to Big Biotech to determine the safety of its own genetically modified organisms if it so chooses.

Many people may remember the deadly epidemic in the late 1980s from the genetically engineered version of L-tryptophan, a food supplement, that was introduced into the market. An estimated 10,000 people became permanently disabled and about 100 died. Yet despite the rapidly occurring, deadly effects from this particular GMO immediately following its release, including noticeable changes in the blood, it took over four years to identify the existence of this epidemic.

Many concerned doctors hypothesize that the disease-causing symptoms of GMOs being consumed today will take years to show up, further besetting the efforts of those who are trying to expose the dangers of GMOs. Current data is showing that since 1996 when genetically modified crops were first introduced, the incidences of people with three or more chronic diseases has jumped from 7 percent to 13 percent.

In addition to all the existing evidence, AAEM is urging its members, the scientific community, and those in medicine to continue gathering case studies and initiate epidemiological research to help determine, once and for all, the effects of GMOs on human beings in addition to their effects on animals.

It is wise to avoid foods that contain GMOs and ingredients that are genetically engineered. These include non-organic corn and soy derivatives, canola and cottonseed oils, and sugar from sugar beets. Ingredients such as corn starch, corn meal, and soy lecithin are great examples of common ingredients that are suspect. Unless labeled as non-GMO or explicitly organic, these common ingredients are most likely genetically modified and should be avoided at all costs.

Lastly, the mindful citizen should contact grocers, food manufacturers, and restaurants to inquire about genetically modified ingredients and oppose their usage. As increasing numbers of people begin to seek out this information across the food supply-chain and purposefully avoid products that contain GMOs, producers and retailers will phase them out in order to meet demand. This can be seen in the gradual elimination of toxins such as high fructose corn syrup from food as consumers learn about its effects and avoid products that contain it.

Call Congress and urge support for mandatory GMO labeling, perhaps even the elimination of GMOs entirely. Get creative. Tell friends and family about the dangers of GMOs, organize local campaigns, and pass out literature. The sooner people become aware of GMOs and the havoc they are causing, and demand their removal from food, the sooner GMOs will exist only in history books as one of the most detrimental scientific experiments ever perpetrated on mankind.

Sources:

Opposing Views, "Genetically Modified Foods Pose Huge Health Risk"

News With Views, "Obama's team includes dangerous biotech 'Yes Men'"

The Times of India - GM food? It's poison

Institute for Responsible Technology

GM pigs to be bred for organ tranplantation to humans

Genetically Modified Pigs to be Bred for Organ Transplant Harvesting

Monday, January 26, 2009 by: David Gutierrez, staff writer
http://www.naturalnews.com/025414.html


A British lord and fertility researcher has announced plans to breed genetically engineered pigs, for the purpose of harvesting their organs for transplant into humans.

"Pigs' organs are the right size for human transplantation, and they work similarly to human organs," said Lord Winston, head of the Institute of Reproductive and Developmental Biology at Hammersmith Hospital in London.

Health professionals have attempted to transplant organs from animals into humans before, but research in the field dropped off in the late 1990s when early transplant attempts were rejected and attacked by recipients' bodies as foreign tissue. Concerns over the possibility that transplants could facilitate the spread of diseases from animals to humans also contributed to a drop in the field's popularity.

Now Winston and colleagues from Imperial College want to revive the idea by breeding pigs that contain six human genes, in order to decrease the chances that the pigs' organs will be rejected by human bodies. They have formed a company called Atazoa that has successfully created transgenic pig sperm, but their research stalled due to strict British regulations over transgenic animals.

"One of the biggest problems in Britain is the regulatory framework. It's been very difficult to get this sort of animal work going," Winston said.

The researchers initially had to wait 13 months before they were licensed to genetically modify the pigs, then were told that regulations prohibited breeding genetically modified animals on agricultural land.

In response, Atazoa has moved its research to the United States, which has drastically fewer regulations concerning genetic research on animals. The researchers will breed the pigs with genetically modified sperm in Missouri, and hope to produce a fully modified animal within the next two years. After that, they hope to begin clinical trials to demonstrate that the genetically engineered organs are safe for human transplant.

Sources for this story include: news.scotsman.com; www.pigprogress.net; www.guardian.co.uk.

Pesticides can bring epidemic obesity besides others...

(NaturalNews) Many people who eat organic food and use natural products are trying to avoid pesticides that are linked to cancer and other diseases. Now Japanese researchers say there is another advantage to "going green" and avoiding toxins and chemical additives in the environment. A common pollutant has been found to have a potent effect on gene activity and could be contributing to the obesity epidemic.

According to an article published in the December issue of the journal Bioscience, the chemical tributyltin affects sensitive receptors in the cells of a host of animals, ranging from water fleas to people. What's more, tributyltin has an impact at extremely low levels -- a thousand times lower than pollutants that are known to interfere with the sexual development of wildlife species, for example. The chemical is known to be damaging to the liver as well as the nervous and immune systems in mammals . But what has just been recognized is that tributyltin also has powerful effects on the cellular components known as retinoid X receptors (RXRs) in a range of species. That's important because RXRs can move into the nuclei of cells and turn on genes that cause the growth of fat storage cells and regulate whole body metabolism. This raises a disturbing possibility: The pollutant could be harming humans by causing slowed metabolism and weight gain.

Scientists Taisen Iguchi and Yoshinao Katsu of the Graduate University for Advanced Studies in Japan, who wrote the BioScience article, point out that effects of tributyltin on RXR-like nuclear receptors could be widespread throughout the animal kingdom, including the human species. And they note that the enormous rise in obesity over the past four decades coincides with the increased use of industrial chemicals over the same period.

Several other ubiquitous pollutants with strong biological effects, including environmental estrogens such as bisphenol A and nonylphenol, also have been found to stimulate the growth of fat storage cells in mice. In a statement to the mediam Iguchi and Katsu said it is "plausible and provocative" to associate the obesity epidemic to chemical triggers found in our modern, polluted environment.

Unfortunately, it isn't easy to avoid tributyltin -- it is frequently used as a preservative in paints for boats, wood and textiles and it is also used as a pesticide on high-value food crops. And if you are expecting the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to make sure you are protected from this potentially dangerous chemical , think again.

A new report just released by the National Research Council warns the EPA's process of generating risk assessments of the adverse effects posed by harmful chemicals found in the environment is bogged down. The EPA is rarely able to connect available scientific data with the information officials need for an accurate risk assessment. The reports states the EPA is struggling to keep up with demands for hazard and dose-response information and doesn't have enough resources to adequately cope.

The risk assessment for trichloroethylene is an example cited by the report. A chemical used to remove grease from metal parts and an ingredient in adhesives, paint removers, typewriter correction fluids, and spot removers, trichloroethylene has been associated with cancer, heart problems and liver and lung damage for decades. However, although a risk assessment for trichloroethylene has been under development since the 1980s, official EPA risk management decisions about the chemical is not expected until 2010.

GMO and their effects on human organism

(NaturalNews) Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are created through an inexact science of shooting genes spliced from bacteria, viruses, insects, animals or humans with a .22 caliber pistol into the DNA of plants or animals laced with a metal such as tungsten. This unsafe science ostensibly supplants millions of years of evolution with little or no scientific justification. In fact, recent research on GMO crops have reported yields to be between 4 to 20 percent less than conventional crops [1-6].

In the 1970's when genetic engineered was pioneered, scientists believed the genome was static and genes could be altered in a uniform manner with the organism only expressing the one intended modification. As research progressed in the 1980's, scientists scrapped the idea of the static genome and moved towards a dynamic genomic belief model. This came about from the realization that by inserting a new gene into a plant, a cascade of unintended consequences arose. Scientists found that there was no possible way to introduce a new gene into an organism and only get one intended result. The genes quickly changed based on a myriad of unknown circumstances that sometimes could not be repeated in the lab even though the exact same procedures were used. The levels of instability from these newly created organisms were overwhelming, but many scientists were silenced.

Safety has always been the number one priority of consumers when it comes to GMOs; antithetically, the seed companies' only priority has been to increase profits at any expense. Therefore, it is no surprise that objective and unbiased researchers have recently added to the growing knowledge of the realities of the increased instability and unintended consequences regarding the long-term safety of GMOs. These researchers recently found clear links among the consumption of GM-corn and decreased fertility, immunological alterations in the gut and the exacerbation and creation of allergies.

Fertility in GM-Fed Mice
Scientists in Austria recently conducted the first ever long-term multi-generational feeding study of Monsanto's genetically modified (GM) corn (NK 603 x MON 810) in mice [7]. The study consisted of two groups: an experimental group, which was fed a 33% GM corn (maize) feed, and a control group, which was fed an equivalent non-GM corn feed. The mice were allowed to live a natural life and were monitored for four generations. Scientists recorded organ weight, gene expression, body mass, metabolism, life span and number of offspring of both groups of mice. The scientists found that mice fed GM corn had significantly less pups per litter than the control group on the third and fourth generation. Furthermore, pups whose parents were fed GM-feed weighed less at birth and at weaning and experienced significantly higher mortality rates than those fed non-GM corn. Lead author of the study Professor Zentek reported that there was a direct link between the decrease in fertility and the GM diet and mice fed non-GM corn reproduced more efficiently.

Gene Expression in GM-Fed Mice
Using a microarray analysis, the scientists reported that 1016 genes had been differentially expressed in the mice fed GM corn with most being up-regulated. Essentially, the GM-fed mice had hundreds of their proteins, which are encoded by genes, expressed in an increased or decreased quantity, which as a corollary altered certain biological processes in their bodies. For example, sensory perception, ion transport and the ability to breakdown proteins (proteolysis) were down-regulated or under-expressed, while the ability of the mice to regulate T-cells (a primary immunological response especially in fighting cancer), circadian rhythm regulation and the FAS signalling pathway (which is a major pathway for cell apoptosis and is important in the elimination of cancers) were over-expressed. This study elucidates the fact that biologic damage from GMOs may not manifest until the third generation and details strong evidence for the mandatory labelling, and even more so for the mass extinction, of these highly dangerous and unnecessary foods.

Immunological Reactions in GM Fed Mice
Italian researchers at the National Institute of Nutrition in Rome, Italy, recently published a study examining the effects of a 50 percent GM-corn (maize) diet on the intestinal immune response of mice [8]. The GM-corn was known as Monsanto's transgenic MON810 and was created using an inserted foreign DNA sequence from the bacteria, Bacillus thuringiensis (BT) designed to protect against a fungus known as the Fusarium species. The study was conducted over 30 and 90-day periods respectively, with mice from two groups, weaning age (mean of 21 days) and old age (mean of 15 months). The study evaluated the peripheral and intestinal immune response to long-term GM-corn and non-GM corn consumption of each group across the two periods. The young and old mice were used because of the lack of research on these subsets as well as their potential susceptibility to immunological changes, more so than non-aged adult animals.

The results of the long-term study revealed significant changes in the immunophenotype of the gut, spleen, circulating lymphocytes and the level of serum cytokines of the mice fed GM-corn. Immunophenotyping essentially determines the expression of proteins by the cells. Any differences in the expression of proteins between the control and the experimental groups would be attributable to the GM diet. Specifically, the researchers found an increased presence of several cytokines in the GM fed mice, which are specifically involved in inflammatory and allergic responses by the body. The researchers also found an increase in the protein expression of lymphocytes (TCRγδ+ population). Within this population, the γδT cells reside in the gut and are associated with regulatory elements of the immune response, specific to infectious agents [9-11]. Elevated amounts γδT cells have been found in asthmatics, children suffering from food allergies, gastrointestinal symptoms and juvenile arthritis [12]. The GM-fed mice also exhibited significant alterations in the number of T and B cells, indicating a significantly abnormal immune response to the genetically altered feed. Furthermore, other researchers have found a newly expressed protein from the consumption of GM corn (50 kDa γ-zein), which is a widely known allergenic protein [13]. In conclusion, from the newly presented research it is apparent that ingesting genetically engineered BT corn not only invokes an anaphylaxis (allergenic) response within the body, it also deregulates several proteins, inhibits fertility and alters the overall immunological response by the body. Clearly, Monsanto whose sole goal is to control the world through food, has a lot of explaining to do.

References

1. Benbrook, C.M. (1999). Evidence of the magnitude and consequences of the Roundup Ready soybean yield drag from university-based varietal trials in 1998. Ag BioTech InfoNet Technical Paper Number 1, www.biotech-info.net/RR_yield_drag_98.pdf
2. University of Nebraska (2000). 'Research shows Roundup Ready soybeans yield less', IANR News Service, www.biotechinfo.net/Roundup_soybeans_yi...
3. Griffiths, M. (1999). 'The emperor's transgenic clothes', Are GMO lemmings in the US leading all of us over the biotechnology cliff? www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents...
4. www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents...
5. Oplinger, E.S., M.J. Martinka, & Schmitz, K.A. (1999) 'Performance of transgenetic soybeans - Northern US', presented to the ASTA Meetings, Chicago.
6. Reported in Farmers Weekly (UK), 4th December 1998. Clark, E.A. (1999) '10 reasons why farmers should think twice before growing GE crops', www.plant.uoguelph.ca/faculty/eclark/10...
7. Cyran, N. Gully, S., Handl, G., Hofstatter, F. Meyer, Skalicky, M., & Steinborn, R. (November 11, 2008). Biological effects of transgenic maize NK603xMON810 fed in long term reproduction studies in mice. Unpublished report: Institute fur Ernahrung, Austria.
8. Finamore, A., Roselli, M., Britti, S., Monastra, G., AMbra, R., & Mengheri, E. (In Press). Intestinal and peripheral immune response to MON810 maize ingestion in weaning and old mice. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry.
9. Tsuchiya, T.; Fukuda, S.; Hamada, H.; Nakamura, A.; Kohama, Y.; Ishikawa, H.; Tsujikawa, K.; Yamamoto, H. Role of γδ T cells in the inflammatory response of experimental colitis mice. Journal of Immunology. 2003, 171, 5507–5513.
10. Groh, V., Steinle, A., Bauer, S., Spies, T. (1998). Recognition of stress induced MHC molecules by intestinal epithelial γδ T cells. Science, 279, 1737–1740.
11. Mombaerts, P., Arnoldi, J., Russ, F., Tonegawa, S., & Kaufmann, S. H. (1993). Different roles of R and γδ T cells in immunity against an intracellular bacterial pathogen. Nature, 365, 53–56.
12. Kokkonen, J., Arvonen, M., Va¨ha¨salo, P., & Karttunen, T. J. (2007). Intestinal immune activation in juvenile idiopathic arthritis and connective tissue disease. Scandanavian Journal of Rheumatology, 36, 386–389.
13. Pasini, G., Simonato, B., Curioni, A., Vincenzi, S., Cristaudo, A., Santucci, B., Peruffo, A. D.; Giannattasio, M. (2002). IgE-mediated allergy to corn: a 50 kDa protein, belonging to the reduced soluble proteins, is a major allergen. Allergy, 57, 98–106.