March 25, 2001
Special Media Compilation #2: PBS TV Broadcast this Monday evening: "Trade Secrets": The Latest in a Long Line of Conspiracies charges + NRDC Blasts Proposal Allowing Deployment of Controversial Navy Sonar Program + Another Approach to Foot & Mouth Disease + The Case for and against vaccination of FMD - BBC London: The pointless slaughter? + Why are animals in Britain not being vaccinated against foot-and-mouth disease? + Medicines Intended for Humans May Contain Mad Cow + GE Alert -- Apr. 3 Deadline for sending critical comments to the FDA about their new set of pro-industry rules on genetically engineered (GE) foods + Doctor Joke
Dear media person
As a follow up to my last email to you, here is some more information on the Low Frequency Sonar issue, plus some interesting viewpoints on the Foot-and-Mouth disease and the mass slaughter of animals in the UK and elsewhere and an analysis about whether vaccinating the animals is a good option or not. You'll also find articles about the risk of getting the human form of Mad Cow Disease through 800 medicines currently on the world market, and an invitation to send comments to the FDA regarding their proposed new rules on genetically engineered (GE) foods that would prevent the public - and those who may be allergic to them - to be informed about the presence of GE ingredients in their food supply. But first you'll find below a reminder and some more critical details about the special 2-hour broadcast "Trade Secrets" on PBS this Monday evening both at 9pm (East Coast time) and 1am.
Hoping some or all of this will be of interest to you
Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator
http://www.cybernaute.com/earthconcert2000
P.S. More personal comments in CAPS below.
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001
"Trade Secrets": The Latest in a Long Line of Conspiracies charges
Samuel S. Epstein, M.D.
Bill Moyers is to be warmly commended for his program "Trade Secrets" to be aired March 26, 2001 .
This PBS Special will document the chemical industry's conspiracy in denying information on the grave cancer risks to hundreds of thousands of workers manufacturing the potent carcinogen vinyl chloride (VC) and its polyvinyl chloride (PVC) product. (Keep reading please)
As newsworthy is the fact that there is a decades-long track record of numerous such conspiracies involving a wide range of industries and chemicals, besides VC. These conspiracies have resulted in an escalation in the incidence and mortality of cancer, and chronic disease, among workers and the general public unknowingly exposed to toxics and carcinogens in the workplace, air, water and consumer products, food, household products, and cosmetics and toiletries.
This misconduct involves negligence, manipulation, suppression, distortion and destruction of health and environmental data by mainstream industries, their consultants and trade associations, notably the Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA). These practices are so frequent as to preclude dismissal as exceptional aberrations and, in many instances, arguably rise to the level of criminality as illustrated below:
* Suppression of evidence from the early 1960's on the toxicity of VC by Dow Chemical, and on its carcinogenicity from 1970 by the VC/PVC industry and the CMA. Based on these findings, a blue ribbon committee of the American Association for the Advancement of Science charged in 1976 that: "Because of the suppression of these data (by the CMA), tens of thousands of workers were exposed without warning to toxic concentrations of VC".
* Suppression of evidence since the 1930's on the hazards of asbestos, asbestosis and lung cancer, by Johns-Manville and Raybestos-Manhattan, besides the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. This information was detailed in industry documents dubbed the "Asbestos Pentagon Papers", released at 1978 Congressional Hearings.
* Suppression by Rohm and Haas of information, known since 1962 but not released until 1971, on the potent carcinogenicity of the resin bischloromethylether. This resulted in deaths from lung cancer of some 50 men, many non-smokers and under the age of 50.
* Suppression of carcinogenicity data on organochlorine pesticides: Aldrin/Dieldrin, by Shell Chemical Company since 1962; Chlordane/Heptachlor, by Velsicol Chemical Company since 1959; and Kepone, by Allied Chemical Company since the early 1960's.
* Falsification in the early 1970's of test data on the drug Aldactone and artificial sweetener Aspartame by Hazleton Laboratories under contract to G.D. Searle Company.
* Falsification and manipulation by Monsanto since the 1960's of data on dioxin, and its contamination of products including the herbicide Agent Orange, designed to block occupational exposure claims and tightening of federal regulations. This evidence was detailed in 1990 by Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Criminal Investigation which charged Monsanto with a "long pattern of fraud" and with reporting "false information" to the Agency.
* Fraudulent claims by Monsanto since 1985 that genetically engineered (rBGH) milk is indistinguishable from natural milk. These claims persist despite contrary evidence.
* Monsanto's reckless marketing in 1976 of plastic Coke bottles made from acrylonitrile, a chemical closely related to VC, prior to its testing for carcinogenicity and migration into the Coke. The bottles were subsequently banned after acrylonitrile was found to be a potent carcinogen contaminating the Coke.
* Destruction of epidemiological data on ethyleneimine and other chemicals by Dow and DuPont. This was admitted at 1973 Department of Labor Advisory Committee meetings in response to challenges to produce data on whose basis industry had falsely claimed that these chemicals were not carcinogens.
* Destruction of test data on drugs, food additives, and pesticides as admitted in 1977 by Industrial Biotest Laboratories, under contract to major chemical industries.
* Failure of the mainstream cosmetics and toiletry industries to warn of the wide range of avoidable carcinogenic ingredients, contaminants and precursors in their products used by the great majority of the U.S. population over virtually their lifetimes.
(For supporting documentation of the above charges, see the author's:
Testimony on White Collar Crime, H.R. 4973, before the Subcommittee on Crime of the House Judiciary Committee, 12/13/79; The Politics of Cancer, 1979; and The Politics of Cancer, Revisited, 1998.)
Hopefully, the public and the media will be outraged by this longstanding evidence of recklessness and conspiracies, graphically reinforced by Moyers' program.
The public and the media should finally hold industry accountable, and demand urgent investigation and radical reform of current industry practices besides governmental unresponsiveness. The Moyers' program has already galvanized formation of a coalition of grassroots citizen groups, "Coming Clean", to demand more responsible and open industry practices, including phasing out the use and manufacture of toxic chemicals.
Criticism should also be directed to the multibillion dollar cancer establishment, the National Cancer Institute and American Cancer Society for their failure to warn Congress, regulatory agencies and the general public of the scientific evidence on the permeation of the totality of the environment with often persistent industrial carcinogens thus precluding corrective legislation and regulation, besides denying workers and the public of their inalienable right to know.
NOTE: PRNewswire, the nation's largest newswire service, who has released Cancer Prevention Coalition's numerous press releases for the last five years, refused to issue this release on "legal grounds".
DATE March 23, 2001
SOURCE Cancer Prevention Coalition.
CONTACT: Samuel S. Epstein, M.D., Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition and Professor environmental and occupational medicine, University of Illinois School of Public Health, Chicago, 312-996-2297; epstein@uic.edu;
http://www.preventcancer.com
HERE IS AN UPDATE TO THE LAST LFAS MATERIAL I SENT YOU
From: "Mark Graffis" <mgraffis@islands.vi>
Subject: NRDC Blasts Proposal Allowing Deployment of Controversial Navy Sonar Program
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001
From Natural Resources Defense Council
Tuesday, March 20, 2001
WASHINGTON -- A rule proposed by the National Marine Fisheries Service that would allow the U.S. Navy to deploy a powerful new global sonar system drew protest from NRDC (the Natural Resources Defense Council) today. The environmental group says the sound generated by the system is so intense that it could harm marine life that depends on hearing for survival. The group called for further study before deployment.
"Whales and other marine species rely on hearing at least as much as people rely on sight," said Joel Reynolds, director of NRDC's Marine Mammal Protection Project. "We are very concerned that the rule the fisheries service has proposed may not protect this essential piece of the ocean environment."
The system, known as LFA for the "low frequency active" sonar it employs, functions much like a floodlight, scanning the ocean at enormous distances for enemy submarines. It is so powerful that a single source can illuminate hundreds of thousands of square miles of ocean at one time. At close range, the noise it produces is millions of times more intense than the Navy considers safe for human divers and billions of times more intense than the level known to disturb large whales. Before NRDC uncovered the program in 1995, the Navy had been testing LFA without the fisheries service's approval.
The fisheries service decided to proceed despite unanswered questions about a mass stranding of whales in the Bahamas last March. A fisheries service-Navy investigation already has established that the strandings were caused by a Navy battle group's active sonar system. That system used mid-frequency sound, which generally does not travel as far as LFA. Last month a marine scientist stated in a letter to the Navy that a number of species stranded in the Bahamas had virtually disappeared from the area.
"The Bahamas strandings confirm just how serious the risks of active sonar can be," said Michael Jasny, an NRDC consultant. "It's astonishing that the fisheries service would propose a rule for a system of such extraordinary reach before its own investigation is completed."
The release of fisheries service's proposed rule opens a 45-day period for public comment that closes May 3. The agency then will decide whether to finalize it. The Navy received more than a thousand comments from concerned parties on its own environmental analysis of LFA, and environmentalists believe that the response to the fisheries service's proposal will be at least as strong.
"The National Marine Fisheries Service has a fundamental responsibility under federal law to ensure the health and safety of marine mammals," Reynolds said. "We will be examining its decision very closely."
The Natural Resources Defense Council is a national, nonprofit organization of scientists, lawyers and environmental specialists dedicated to protecting public health and the environment. Founded in 1970, NRDC has more than 400,000 members nationwide, served from offices in New York, Washington, Los Angeles and San Francisco.
For more information, contact Joel Reynolds at (323) 934-6900 or Michael Jasny at (323) 934-2138 Natural Resources Defense Council (323) 934-6900
Web site: http://www.nrdc.org
Note from Jean: For those who are willing to pursue this matter more in depth, the proposed rule is available at http://manyrooms.net/lfaproposedrule.htm
IN RESPONSE TO THE MASS SLAUGHTER AND WASTEFUL BURNING OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF FARM ANIMALS WORLDWIDE IN A VAIN ATTEMPT TO ERADICATE THE FOOT & MOUTH DISEASE, TREVOR OSBORNE FROM AUSTRALIA HAS THIS MOST REASONABLE APPROACH TO PROPOSE (see below). I ALSO HEARD A WORLD EXPERT ON THIS DISEASE ON THE RADIO A COUPLE DAYS AGO (here in Quebec) AND HE SAID IT HAS BEEN AROUND FOR CENTURIES AND THAT IT NORMALLY KILLED ONLY 5% OF FARM ANIMALS (BEFORE LARGE-SCALE INDUSTRIAL FARMING EXISTED) AND THAT ALL OTHER ANIMALS WITH STRONGER IMMUNE SYSTEMS NATURALLY HEALED FROM IT. KILLING OVER 0NE MILLION (AND POSSIBLY UP TO 30 MILLION AS NOW DISCUSSED) ANIMALS AS IS NOW BEING DONE, IN SOMETIMES TERRIBLE CONDITIONS FOR THEM, MAY THEREFORE NOT BE THE BEST SOLUTION TO RESOLVING THIS CRISIS DUE LARGELY TO UNNATURAL FARMING METHODS AND, AS EXPLAINED BELOW, TO THE WEAKENING OF ANIMALS THROUGH THE CONTINUED DEPRIVATION OF VITAL TRACE MINERAL ELEMENTS IN THE FOOD NOW GROWN AND GIVEN TO THEM - AND US ALL!! - IN MINERAL-DEPLETED AND THUS UNBALANCED SOILS.
NOTE ALSO THIS WEBSITE RECOMMENDED ON THIS TOPIC: http://www.whatareweswallowing.com/
ONCE THERE, MAKE SURE TO READ "The official, the string pullers and the Birmingham 17 -- A farmer’s perspective on a visit from the MAFF"
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001
From: Trevor <wharmony@iinet.net.au>
Subject: Another Approach to Foot & Mouth Disease
Hi Jean,
I thought you might like a copy of an email I sent to all Australian federal politicians and dozens of Australian and NZ media outlets regarding the another approach to the Foot & Mouth situation. You are at liberty to use it if you so wish.
Trevor
___________
My name is Trevor Osborne.
I was trained as an agricultural scientist and farm advisor in the UK in the early 1950's. This was the time when the chemical farming era just began. We were taught age old methods that worked with nature, not against it as we now do. Pests and diseases were controlled naturally by what was known as good husbandry... both crop husbandry and animal husbandry. The premise was, if your soils are healthy, then your crops will be healthy. If your crops are healthy then your animals will be healthy (see below). Healthy crops and animals have natural resistance to all disease. If it were not the case those species would have died out aeons ago. Nature does not rely on drugs and mass slaughter to control diseases, it relies on the species natural immunity and they survive because that's the way nature works... when you let it! It seems we have chosen to ignore the lessons we learned over many centuries. How long is it going to take for humanity to wake up to this fact? What we need to do is learn and practice "health creation" not "disease eradication" both in agriculture and in human health. Then, and only then will be start to reverse the disastrous situation we find ourselves in both sectors.
This brings me to the current Foot & Mouth Disease (FMD) situation. FMD is not a fatal disease under normal classification methods. It is akin to flu in humans... yes, people can die from it but usually only the weak, elderly and undernourished. In other words those people whose immune systems are low. Simplistically, the same applies to FMD... those animals with very weak immune systems may die. Those with weak immune systems will suffer the symptoms and then recover. Those with strong immune systems will not even exhibit the symptoms (see attached article).
This being the case the obvious LONG TERM answer to the problem is, build the immune system of the animals. And this is done by practising good husbandry. This doesn't mean we have to go back 50 or 100 years. No, it is about using what we know of the old, and combining it with the new. For example, it is well know in some circles that most agricultural soils have been depleted of certain minerals and humus... both of which are necessary for healthy and nutritious crops. There is a quick and economic answer to this. It involves applying mineral-rich volcanic rock dust and organic carbon to the soils. Two companies I know of in Australia are involved in this, there are probably more in other counties:
1. International Mineral Consultants Pty Ltd: www.minplus.com.au/
2. Sustainable Agriculture & Food Enterprises Pty. Ltd. www.mineralfertiliser.com.au/
To supplement my above statements I have attached a document written by Sir Albert Howard (Hon Fellow of Imperial College of Science) in 1945 entitled, DISEASE AND HEALTHY LIVESTOCK. It can be found at the following website: http://www.whatareweswallowing.com/. I am also including a copy taken from Hansard (Australian Parliament records) and one from the US Congress both of which allude to the importance of soils to animal & human health. If you require more evidence regarding the above please ask.
I hope this brief overview may provide you with an inkling of where we are collectively heading and what needs to be done to change to a win-win-win direction.
Regards...
Trevor Osborne, NDA
---
Note from Jean: Here is the entire relevant excerpt from the Australian Parliament record sent by Trevor:
House Hansard -- 26-03-1998 -- Page 1762
STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS
Soil Degradation
Mr EOIN CAMERON (Stirling)(9.50 a.m.)
A serious situation has been brought to my attention that should be of concern to all of us: a situation that affects every man, woman and. child in this country, irrespective of age. I refer to the mineral degradation of the soils from which our food is derived. A United States Senate report in 1936 said that the alarming fact is that the foods (fruits, vegetables and grains) now being raised on millions of acres of land that no longer contain enough of certain minerals are starving us, no matter how much of them we eat.' From preliminary investigations, it has become evident that our soils are equally as deficient in trace minerals as the soils in the United States are - if not more so - not only from the plants point of view, but also from the human body's point of view.
There is little, if any, consideration given to the mineral content of our foods. The only consideration to date has been to maximising the yields of any given crop. So, if the crop requires more trace minerals to grow well, it is given them; but if we humans require trace minerals to be healthy but the plant does not need them our requirements are totally ignored. What is more, it is not commonly realised that vitamins control the body's use of minerals and that, in the absence of minerals, vitamins have no function to perform at all. Lacking vitamins, the system can make some use of minerals; but, lacking minerals, vitamins are completely useless. This is vital to the health of our nation. Without the proper mineral balance in our bodies, we cannot function properly and we start degenerating in a progressively downward spiral - slowly at first, but then faster and faster until the degeneration gets to a point where we, as individuals, can no longer ignore the devastating symptoms that, more often than not, end up killing us. That is the way it happens to most of us. And the sad part is that we think it is natural, just a part of getting old. It is not natural and it is not part of getting old.
Back in 1936, the warning was loud and clear that, if we do not get all the minerals we need to stay healthy, we will get sick, suffer and have shorter lives. Dr Linus Pauling, twice a Nobel prize winner, stated that you can trace every sickness, every disease and every ailment to mineral deficiency. What we have been doing for the past 50 years or so is taking 60 minerals [start page 1763] out of the soil and only replacing three: nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. If you ran your bank account like that, with $60 out and $3 in, what would happen? You would end up bankrupt.
Although this is a very serious and complex situation, there are some simple, commonsense answers. For example, some very positive research has been conducted over several years in North Queensland and elsewhere, where the adding of mineral rock dust containing up to 70 mineral elements to various soils not only increased the tonnage of the crops there but also reduced the acidity of the soil, while replenishing the depleted minerals at the same time. According to our preliminary research, this Queensland quarry has an estimated reserve of around 20 million tonnes, while another 23 reserves have already been identified. There is simple evidence to support what I am saying, for all of those who would like to check it out.
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001
From: Trevor <wharmony@iinet.net.au>
Subject: The Case for and against vaccination of FMD - BBC London: The pointless slaughter?
Hi Jean,
In the interest of considering all options regarding Foot & Mouth Disease (FMD) I have compiled two articles and three audio recordings for your information. These were taken from London's BBC's website that discuss the option of using FMD vaccines as an answer to the current outbreak.
Hope this helps to provide a balanced point of view to the FMD situation.
Warm regards...
Trevor Osborne
---
BBC - London, Sunday, 25 February, 2001
The pointless slaughter?
By environment correspondent Alex Kirby
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1189000/1189436.stm
Up and down the UK the funeral pyres are burning, cremating the remains of pigs, cattle and sheep that could have contracted foot-and-mouth. The government's remedy for this highly contagious disease is to slaughter every animal judged to be at risk.
In the last big outbreak in 1967, more than 400,000 animals were killed. But there are grounds for arguing that the slaughter policy is misconceived. How real a risk?
It is not strictly necessary, as the disease poses no real risk to human health. At most it can occasionally lead to a mild infection and it is not invariably fatal to the animals themselves
In adult cattle only a small minority usually succumbs, though the death rate can be much higher in younger animals, and in pigs.
But there is a vaccine available, which although it has never been used in the European Union, is widely used in some other parts of the world.
Animals that have recovered from foot-and-mouth are usually weakened, producing less milk and suffering weight loss.
But whether that would leave UK farmers in a worse plight than they face already is debatable.
For full story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1189000/1189436.stm
__________________________
BBC London - Tuesday, 6 March, 2001
Why not vaccinate?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1205000/1205117.stm
By BBC News Online's Ivan Noble
Why are animals in Britain not being vaccinated against foot-and-mouth disease?
It is difficult to sell animal products unless they come from somewhere which is certifiably free of foot-and-mouth disease. The problem is that the test for foot-and-mouth cannot tell the difference between a vaccinated animal and an infected animal. The authorities are therefore reluctant to allow vaccination because it would make it very hard to prove Britain had beaten the disease.
How does the vaccine work?
It is made by deactivating the live foot-and-mouth virus. The vaccine is harmless but still triggers an animal's immune system to make antibodies against the disease. There are seven varieties or serotypes of foot-and-mouth, and a specific vaccination is required for each one. The virus involved in the UK outbreak is a serotype O virus and was first isolated in northern India in 1990.
How effective is the vaccine?
It takes 10 to 14 days to become effective and even then does not offer complete protection. The virus responsible for the current outbreak is highly virulent and, in high enough concentration, could overwhelm the protection offered by the vaccine. And a vaccinated animal which did contract the disease might not show many symptoms but would still pass the disease on.
How easy is it to make?
Bayer AG in Germany says it can make 100,000 doses in 24 hours and a million doses in five days. To make the vaccine, cells are grown in the lab and then infected with the foot-and-mouth virus. Chemicals are used to make the virus inactive. Strict precautions are needed to contain the active virus during the manufacturing process.
How big are the vaccine stockpiles?
Around half a million doses of the vaccine for each serotype are stored in the UK.
Who is in charge of deciding whether to vaccinate?
Any decision to start vaccinating would have to be taken by the Agriculture Minister Nick Brown. He would consult both the government's Chief Veterinary Officer and his cabinet colleagues. But as a spokesman for Maff, the agriculture ministry, told BBC News Online: "Farmers, the livestock industry and food processors are strongly against foot-and-mouth disease vaccinations, and the government agrees. The use of the vaccine would mean the loss of Britain's disease-free status and this would cripple exports. The best course is to stamp out the disease quickly."
Are new vaccines in the pipeline?
Experimental synthetic vaccines are being developed but they are not approved for use. If they were used, it might be possible to tell the difference between vaccinated herds and infected herds, but it is not clear whether they would be any more effective in tackling the disease on a national scale.
Might vaccination be a good idea?
It has been suggested that vaccinating animals close to the site of an outbreak would form a kind of firewall against the disease. But the more the number of outbreaks, the harder this would be. The question is an economic one: a European Commission study into the costs of vaccination found that even though food-and-mouth is not fatal in most animals, it is cheaper in the long term to slaughter rather than to vaccinate.
AUDIOS
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1205000/1205117.stm
David Byrne, EU health commissioner
"There is a place for vaccination in certain circumstances"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1205000/audio/_1205117_foot07_byrne.ram
Roger Waite, European farm policy expert
"Very much a contingency plan"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1205000/audio/_1205117_waite.ram
Bob Stevenson, former vets' association president
"Vaccination has proved to be unsatisfactory in controlling disease"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1205000/audio/_1205117_stephenson.ram
---
See also:
Incidents of Foot-and-Mouth Disease Rise in U.K.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Foot-and-Mouth.html
And from: http://www.whatareweswallowing.com/
The official, the string pullers and the Birmingham 17
A farmer’s perspective on a visit from the MAFF.
From: http://www.unknowncountry.com/news/?id=398
Medicines Intended for Humans May Contain Mad Cow
23-Mar-2001
There are more than 800 medicines on the world market that could carry CJD, the human form of Mad Cow Disease.
In Britain, companies were given until March 1st to prove that their products were free from the disease. But the Medicines Control Agency (MCA) has admitted that there are still around 860 medicines that have not yet been cleared. Clive Everf of the CJD Support Network, said, “I find it deeply worrying that the drug companies have so far failed to provide this information.”
A spokeswoman for the MCA said, “The government will consider what action should be taken to ensure that these products comply with these important safety guidelines.”
Many drugs are made using animal materials like cattle serum. In the U.S., buyers should be especially wary of products sold in health food stores, which are not subject to FDA regulation. Calcium supplements can be made of ground-up bone meal and any product that claims to boost brain function could be made of powdered animal brains.
Last fall, the British government withdrew an oral polio vaccine after it became clear it had been developed from serum which could possibly have been infected with BSE. The government’s Chief Medical Officer Liam Donaldson said the risks were “incalculably small,” but it was removed from use anyway.
Frances Hall, whose son Peter died from CJD in 1996, said, “The risk may be small but any amount of danger is too much if it is your family that’s affected. It seems we are playing Russian roulette.”
See also:
Medicines could carry vCJD (18-March-2001)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_1225000/1225284.stm
Mad Cow Spreading to Felines (21-Mar-2001) at:
http://www.unknowncountry.com/news/?id=391
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001
From: NLP News Flashes <NLPNews@natural-law.org>
Subject: GE Alert -- Apr. 3 Deadline for sending critical comments to the FDA about their new set of pro-industry rules on genetically engineered (GE) foods
TELL THE FDA THAT GENETICALLY ENGINEERED PRODUCTS MUST BE LABELED AND TESTED FOR SAFETY!
The Food and Drug Administration is now accepting public comment on its proposed new rules on genetically engineered (GE) foods. Despite overwhelming consumer demand, the FDA has failed to require health and ecological safety testing or mandatory labeling, and thus puts your health and our environment at risk and deprives you of the right to know or choose what you are eating.
The proposed rules:
* Do not require mandatory pre-market safety testing
* Do not require pre-market environmental review
* Do not require mandatory labeling of GE foods
* Restrict voluntary labeling of non-GE foods
* Require a mere letter of notification prior to the marketing of a GE food
* Fail to ensure public access to adequate information for independent review
* Are supported by industry and opposed by consumer groups
The FDA needs to hear from hundreds of thousands of Americans that:
* The FDA must require mandatory pre-market comprehensive environmental review. Unlike conventional pollutants, where a given amount of pollutant causes a limited amount of damage, a small number of mutant genes could have a population explosion and reproduce forever, causing unlimited and irreparable damage.
* The FDA must require mandatory pre-market long-term health testing. GE products could be toxic, cause allergic responses, have lower nutritional value, and compromise immune responses in consumers.
* The FDA must require mandatory labeling of GE products. Without mandatory labeling, neither consumers nor health professionals will know if an allergic or toxic reaction was the result of a genetically engineered food. Consumers would be deprived of the critical knowledge needed to hold food producers liable should any of these novel products be hazardous.
* The FDA must end its cozy relationship with the industries it purports to be regulating. People have been allowed to work for a biotech company, then work for the FDA writing the regulatory rules on that company's product, then go back to working for the company. Ninety-two percent of FDA advisory committee meetings had at least one conflict of interest.
PLEASE ACT TODAY. THE DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS IS TUESDAY, APRIL 3.
Email your comments to: fdadockets@oc.fda.gov with "Docket 00N-1396 & Docket 00D-1598" in the Subject line
Mail your comments to: Docket 00N-1396 & Docket 00D-1598 Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061 Rockville, MD 20852
For more information: www.organicconsumers.org , 218-226-4164
Doctor Joke
An Israeli doctor said, "Medicine in my country is so advanced, we can take a kidney out of one person, put it in another, and have him looking for work in 6 weeks."
A German doctor said, "That's nothing! In Germany we can take a lung out of one person, put it in another, and have him looking for work in 4 weeks."
A Russian doctor said, "In my country medicine is so advanced, we can take half a heart from one person, put it in another, and have them both looking for work in 2 weeks."
The American doctor, not to be outdone said, "You guys are all way behind. In my country we have just taken an idiot out of Texas and put him in the White House and now half of the country is looking for work!!!
