The Health Effects Of Canola Oil -
None Dare Call It Rape.
By Don Harkins for the SPOTLIGHT From the Idaho Observer 5-99
http://proliberty.com/observer/19990502.htm 12-13-99
Canola is a name that recently
appeared in the marketplace and is apparently derived from Canadian-oil. Canola
oil is actually produced from the rape seed plant. Rape (Brassica napus), a
member of the mustard family, is listed in the Encyclopedia Britannica as a
poisonous plant with toxic effects which include pulmonary emphysema,
respiratory distress, anemia, constipation, irritability and blindness in
cattle.
According to John Thomas, author of
Young Again: How to Reverse the Aging Process, The name canola disguised the
introduction of rape oil to America.
Rape oil was widely used in animal
feeds in Great Britain between 1986 and 1991 at which time its use was
discontinued, Thomas wrote.
Most people remember the mad cow
disease epidemic and that cows, pigs and sheep went blind, behaved insanely,
attacked other animals and people and had to be destroyed.
Reports at the time blamed the erratic
behavior of livestock on a viral disease called scrapie (in sheep and pigs) and
mad cow disease in cattle. However, when rape oil was removed from animal feed,
'scrapie' disappeared, Thomas explained.
According to Dr. Len Horowitz, author
of Emerging Viruses, AIDS and Ebola: Nature, Accident or Intentional, What is
scrapie in sheep, mad cow disease in cattle, wasting disease in wild game
animals, whirling disease in fish is Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease in
people.
English experts told people not to
panic if they had been cooking with rape oil when mad cow disease was at its
peak in Great Britain, said Thomas. The 'experts' added that the effects of rape
oil ingestion takes at least 10 years to manifest.
With grain prices down and grass seed
growers faced with increasing opposition to their seasonal field burning,
beautiful yellow rape fields are contrasting deep green panoramas of what has
traditionally been field after field of grasses and grains in the northwest
United States. Rape, the most toxic of all food-oil plants that has no natural
insectoid predators, is a weed that can grow vigorously in most climates and
terrains throughout North America.
Rape toxicity
The toxic properties of the rape plant
are cyanide-containing compounds called isothiocyanates. Thomas explains that
cyanide inhibits the production of ATP in our bodies. ATP is the energy molecule
that powers the body and keeps us healthy and young.
According to Thomas, ...glaucoma is
the result of insufficient blood flow due to agglutination (clumping together)
of the red blood cells and waste buildup on the cells and intercellular fluids.
Thomas believes that ingestion of rape over time may cause glaucoma.
Thomas also believes that ingestion of
rape over several years causes other vision irregularities such as
retinitis.
Thomas explains how the clumped red
blood cells cannot squeeze through the tiny capillaries in the posterior of the
eye and, therefore, cannot deliver oxygen to the mitochondria (the rod-shaped
bodies in a cell that facilitate the metabolism of fats, sugars and
proteins).
Rape oil, as metabolized in the body,
produces the latex-like substance that causes the agglutination of red blood
cells, explained Thomas.
In this respect, glaucoma has much in
common with hair loss, Alzheimer's disease, multiple sclerosis, cerebral palsy
and hearing problems.
Rape and the central nervous
system
Rape is an acetlycholinesterase
inhibitor. Acetylcholine is critical to the transmission of signals from nerves
to muscles. When the normal function of aceytlcholinesterase is compromised,
nerve fibers are not able to send the signals properly and muscles will not
respond as expected.
In the last 20 years we have seen a
dramatic increase in muscular disorders such as multiple sclerosis and cerebral
palsy. Soy and (rape) oils are players in the outbreak of these disease
conditions. So are the organophosphates--insecticides such as malthion-- used in
food production in the name of efficiency, commented Thomas.
There are many people throughout the
country who are convinced that rape oil is poisonous to the human body and that
the body digests rape in such a fashion that congests the blood and restricts
the flow of lymph fluid which can cause a myriad of physical and psychological
disorders. Moreover, using processed foods containing canola oil, soy oil and
chemical additives confuses the body and weakens the immune system, continued
Thomas.
Thomas recommends that anybody who
desires to enjoy optimal health must take personal responsibility for what they
put into their bodies. 'Health care' industry is an oxymoron, concluded Thomas;
it protects its own health and its own economic interests. Learn to protect your
health and economic interests by learning how to take care of yourself. Then act
on that knowledge.
Young Again: How to Reverse the Aging
Process is published by Promotion Publishing, San Diego, CA. _____
The Idaho Observer P.O. Box 1353
Rathdrum, Idaho 83858-1353 Phone: 208-687-9441 Email:
<mailto:observer@dmi.netobserver@dmi.net Web: Link
_____
Canola Oil - Is It Safe? Evidence
Points To BIG Trouble
Compiled by Darleen Bradley
From Hilary A. Thomas <standingrock@pagosa.net> 5-9-99
Canola Oil
This article is made public here on
the net as a public service announcement and does not necessarily reflect the
views of this website owner. We encourage you to do further research and
determine the validity of the following for yourself.
Canola oil from the rape seed,
referred to as the Canadian oil because Canada is mainly responsible for it
being marketed in the USA The Canadian government and industry paid our Federal
Food and Drug Administration (FDA). $50 million dollars to have canola oil
placed on the (GRAS) List "Generally Recognized As Safe" . Thus a new industry
was created. Laws were enacted affecting international trade, commerce, and
traditional diets. Studies with lab. animals were disastrous. Rats developed
fatty degeneration of heart, kidney, adrenals, and thyroid gland. When canola
oil was withdrawn from their diets, the deposits dissolved but scar tissue
remained on all vital organs. No studies on humans were made before money was
spent to promote Canola oil in the USA.
Adrenoleukodystrophy (ALD) is a rare
fatal degenerative disease caused by in a build up long-chain fatty acids (c22
to c28) which destroys the myelin (protective sheath )of the nerves. Canola oil
is a very long chain fatty acid oil (c22). Those who will defend canola oil say
that the Chinese and Indians have used it for centuries with no effect, however
it was in an unrefined form.*
My cholesterol level was 150. After a
year using Canola oil I tested 260. I switched back to pure olive oil and it has
taken 5 years to get it down to 160. Thus began this project to find answers
since most Doctors will say that Canola oil is O.K.
My sister spilled Canola oil on a
piece of fabric, after 5 pre-treatings and harsh washings, the oil spot still
showed. She stopped using Canola oil ,wondering what it did to our insides if it
could not be removed from cloth easily.
Our Father bred birds, always checking
labels to insure there was no rape seed in their food. He said, "The birds will
eat it, but they do not live very long."
A friend who worked for only 9 mo. as
a quality control taster, at an apple-chip factory where Canola oil was used
exclusively for frying, developed numerous health problems including loose
teeth; gum disease, gum and nail beds turned gray; numb hands and feet with
cramps, swollen arms and legs upon rising in the morning; extreme joint pain
especially in hands; cloudy vision; constipation with stools like black marbles;
hearing loss; skin tears from being bumped; lack of energy; hair loss; and heart
pains. It has been five years since she has worked there and still has some
joint pain, gum disease, and numbness. A fellow worker, about 30 yrs. old who
ate very little product, had a routine check up and found that his blood vessels
were like those of an 80 year old man. Two employees fed the waste product to
baby calves and their hair fell out. After removing the fried apple chips from
the diet their hair grew back in.
Be sure to check products for
ingredients. If it says, "This product may contain one or more of the
following".... and lists Canola oiL you can expect it to contain canola oil
because it is the cheapest oil and the government subsidizes Canola oil to some
industries involved in food processing, bakeries and schools.
My daughter and her girls were telling
jokes. Stephany hit her mom's arm with the back of a butter knife in a gesture,
"Oh mom" not hard enough to hurt. My daughters arm split open like it was
rotten. She called me to ask what could have caused it. I said, "I'll bet
anything that you are using Canola oil". Sure enough, there was a big gallon jug
in the pantry.
Rape seed oil is a penetrating oil, to
be used in light industry, not for human consumption. It contains a toxic
substance. (from encyclopedia ) Even after the processing to reduce the erucic
acid content, it is still a penetrating oil. We have found that it turns rancid
very fast. Also it leaves a residual rancid odor on clothing.
Rape seed oil used for stir-frying in
China found to emit cancer causing chemicals. (Rapeseed oil smoke causes lung
cancer) Amal Kumar Maj. The Wall Street JournaL June 7, 1995 pB6(W) pB6 (E) col
1(11 col in). * taken from FATS THAT HEAL AND FATS THAT KILL by Udo
Erasmus.
Canola oil is a health hazard to use
as a cooking oil or salad oil. It is not the healthy oil we thought it was, it
is not fit for human consumption.
_____
Canola - Canada's Oil Spill Onto The American Market
By Janet Allen <janetplanet1@earthlink.net>
c. 1997, 2000 All Rights Reserved 2-3-2000
"Knock knock..." "Who's there?"
"Canola..." "Canola who?" "Canola you scientists please explain what's so good
about eating oil from the genetically altered rapeseed plant?"
When it comes to the fats and oils we
Americans use for cooking, whether at home or in the commercial food industry,
Canola oil can best be de- scribed as the "new kid on the block." A Neighborhood
Watch of sorts, however, has been organized recently by health and consumer
advocates who have some well-founded suspicions that this biotech test-tube baby
is not all that its seeds are cracked up to be. Although the official image of
Canola oil has been almost that of a panacea, a heart-healthy,
make-your-doctor-proud alternative to other naughty fats, perhaps it's time to
flip the coin of opinion and wander into the territory of those who beg to
differ. After all, some degree of controversy is brewing on this front, and the
new kid you've welcomed into your frying pan just may be playing with matches,
ready to watch your good health go up in smoke.
KING 'LEAR': WHAT'S IN A
NAME?
But first...a little background on the
defendant: A brainchild of the Canadian seed-oil industry, Canola was fashioned
from its genetic ancestor as a safer, more palatable variety of what was
previously referred to there as "lear oil" ("low erucic acid rapeseed"). Its
name was changed for the international market to an abbreviated version of the
term Canadian oil, hence: "Canola." Distracting the public's attention from any
association with the word "rape" was just the first of many premeditated ploys
to coax the blank-slate consumer into accepting this promising new culinary
commodity.
The Rapeseed plant has been grown for
thousands of years for camp oil and cooking oil, and in the 1940's was employed
as a lubricant for steam locomotives and ship engines (soon being replaced by
diesel fuel). In addition, this semi-drying oil is used as a fuel, soap base,
synthetic rubber base, and illuminant for slick, magazine-style, color pages. A
member of the mustard family, Rape oil, according to some sources, is also used
to produce the chemical warfare agent "Mustard Gas," as well as the more benign
homeopathic remedy "Thiosinaminum." Canadian farmers were initially introduced
to it as an oil crop in 1942, but not until 1957 was an edible form of its oil
first extracted. However, its versatility was limited as a commercial crop due
to some inherently negative characteristics. It contained high amounts of two
undesirable substances: ERUCIC ACID, which can be harmful to humans, and
GLUCOSINOLATES, which have the damaging effect of inhibiting livestock growth.
But scientists will be scientists, and eventually breeders were successful in
developing varieties low in both of these compounds. In 1974, researchers at the
University of Manitoba, Winnipeg utilized genetic engineering techniques to
alter its chemical composition, making Canola more suitable for
consumption.
According to the Canadian Canola
Growers Association (CCGA) based in Manitoba, "Canola is a multi-million dollar
industry that contributes immensely to the Canadian economy through job creation
and trade." That's not too surprising, considering the Canadian government
provides large agricultural subsidies to growers of this crop. Whereas in the
1940's, a mere 6,000 acres of rapeseed was harvested there per year, the
nineties decade has seen the figure multiply to 10.5 million acres annually,
nearly half of that grown in Saskatchewan. Now that the Canola boom has hit
hard, American farmers have grabbed a piece of the action in our Pacific
northwest, north central, and southeast, where blossoming fields of the bright
yellow flower is a familiar sight in summer. Each plant produces numerous pods
(about one-fifth the size of pea pods, but similiar in shape), within which are
tiny round seeds that are crushed to obtain the 40% oil they contain. The
remainder of the seed is processed into canola meal, sold as a high-protein
animal feed. Currently, Canola holds the position of fifth in the world trade in
agricultural crops, after rice, wheat, maize, and cotton. It is the third most
significant Canadian grain export, after wheat and barley.
All sounds fine and dandy...so where's
the problem?
POLITICS AS USUAL
In 1988, the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration permitted the coined name "Canola" to be used as a generic name
for "lear oil," resulting in a significant increase in its importation into this
country. Today, we purchase in excess of 80% of Canada's total production of
edible vegetable oils, 63% of which is Canola. As a matter of public record, the
Canadian government and industry paid our (FDA) $50 million dollars to have
Canola oil placed on the GRAS ("Generally Recognized As Safe") list, part of a
scheme to sidestep the otherwise lengthy and much more expensive approval
process. Thus a new industry was created. What's more, absolutely no medical
research on humans was required or completed (similar to the approval of food
irradiation and genetically engineered foods) to establish the oil's safety or
benefits before money was spent to promote it in this country. However, the
misconception that experimentation with non-human species is a viable tool for
determining safety apparently led scientists to engage in studies with
laboratory animals that were "disastrous. Rats developed fatty degeneration of
heart, kidney, adrenals, and thyroid gland. When canola oil was withdrawn from
their diets, the deposits dissolved but scar tissue remained on all vital
organs." Yet the ironic thing is that, even though these studies were mistakenly
believed to have some validity, they were nevertheless disregarded anyway...just
another good example of bad science, wasted revenues, and unnecessary
suffering.
GREASE IS THE WORD, IS THE WORD
THAT YOU HEARD
The nutritional springboard off which
Canola oil's career was launched involves the discovery by dietary experts that
it has the lowest level of saturated fat content (6-7%) of any oil, contains
more cholesterol- lowering monounsaturated fat (58-62%) than any except olive
oil, and has a moderate level of polyunsaturated fat (32%) The latter two are
deemed to be essential sources of energy and possible factors in lowering the
risk of heart disease. Like all non-animal derived, plant-based fats, it is
cholesterol-free. Another selling point is Canola's distinction of containing
Omega-3 (10-15%) and Omega-6 (23%) fatty acids, reputed to lower both
cholesterol and triglycerides, as well as contributing to brain growth and
development. Log onto any Canola industry website, and this is the standard
company line you'll encounter, with minor variations. Fazio Foods Intl., a
Vancouver-based operation, even went so far as posting: "Nutrition experts
recognize canola oil as having the best fatty acid ratio." I guess these
"experts" live on one of those other planets where the vastly superior flax,
hemp, borage, and blackcurrant oils have yet to be cultivated. In addition to
some of the above glowing sentiments, the FOOD LOVER'S COMPANION by Sharon Tyler
Herbst states: "The bland-tasting canola oil is suitable both for cooking and
for salad dressings." Apparently harboring an ignorance about this devitalized,
flavorless ingredient, Ms. Herbst should be informed that all oils lose their
naturally nutty, unique, full-bodied tastes and aromas (as well as nutritive
content) after the manufacturing industry's tireless assault of an array of
destructive processes: Refining; Degumming; Batch acidulation; Bleaching;
Deodorization; High temperature expeller pressing; and Chemical extraction
methods using gasoline-like solvents. Now doesn't that sound
appetizing?
HOW SWEET IT ISN'T
In speaking with Sam Gerard, health
consultant and CEO of The Ultimate Life corporation (manufacturer of health
products, including the best-selling The Ultimate Meal nutritional powder), I
was delighted to receive a logical, simple outlook on the whole issue of Canola
oil's merits: "It's not a matter of how bad it is, but about how great it's not.
It's not even in the equation, nowhere near the Top Five best oils, falling way
below even Safflower. It might be low in saturated fat, but it's by no means the
best in essential fatty acids, which is the primary purpose of consuming oils.
No matter how much technology advances, all it's ever trying to do is mimic or
duplicate the abundant genius of nature. Emphasizing Canola's good points is a
marketing concept, because they are selling Canola oil, and can't tell you to go
out and buy the much healthier Flax or Borage or Olive, which are their
competition." According to Gerard, Flax ranks in first place (richest in Omega-3
and -6 essential fatty acids) and Borage a close second (the highest source of
gamma linoleic acid at 21%, as compared to Evening Primrose Oil at below 10%).
As high temperatures would destroy their healing qualities, they should be used
cold in salad dressings and cereals, or added to foods after cooking.
Extra-virgin Olive oil (third on the list) and Sunflower oil (fourth) are more
stable and may be used for frying or other heat-related preparations. Although
Hemp oil is the true winner in the "best ratio of essential fatty acids"
category, Gerard feels that the product's cleanliness and integrity is still in
question because it is such a young industry, with controls and standards not
yet in place. (Please call 800/THE-MEAL--or 800/843-6325--for further inquiries
about The Ultimate Life products.)
DOWN IN THE MOUTH
Detouring from this common sense,
elimination-by-default approach to Canola oil's fall from glory, other health
advocates are taking a more vocal, radical position. Sally Fallon, author of
NOURISHING TRADITIONS,
writes: "Rapeseed is unfit for human
consumption because it contains a very long-chain fatty acid called "erucic
acid," which in large quan- tities is associated with fibrotic lesions in the
heart. Canola oil was bred to contain little if any erucic acid (2%) and has
drawn the attention of nutritionists because of its high oleic acid content. But
there are some indications that Canola oil presents dangers of its own. It has a
high sulphur content and goes rancid easily. Baked goods made with Canola oil
develop mold very quickly. The Omega-3 fatty acids of processed Canola oil
contain trans-fatty acids similar to those in margarine and possibly more
dangerous to the health." Fallon concludes with the warning that it should be
avoided completely. Even the conservative HARVARD HEALTH LETTER refers to
trans-fats as "the new enemy," citing mounting scientific evidence that they
contribute to heart disease and other adverse conditions. Award-winning
researcher Edward Siguel, M.D., Ph.D., author of ESSENTIAL FATTY ACIDS IN HEALTH
AND DISEASE, was invited to investigate fatty acids as part of the Framingham
Cardiovascular Offspring Study. After developing a sensitive test to determine
amounts within the human system, he found a definite correlation between
trans-fat levels and cardiovascular illness. In 1994, in a presentation before
the Second Annual Symposium on Functional Medicine, Siguel concluded that "the
insufficiency of EFA's (essential fatty acids) may underlie many of the chronic
diseases so prevalent in Western societies," cautioning as well that low-fat
diets not based on whole foods might be hazardous in this regard.
Surprisingly, Fallon offers evidence
that tropical oils such as Palm kernel and Coconut are actually a healthier
option to Canola and believes that the bad rap they have received is a result of
intense lobbying by the vegetable oil industry. Extremely stable, they can be
stored at room temperature for many months without turning rancid (and thereby
carcinogenic). Although they contain between 80-90% saturated fat, over
two-thirds of these are in the form of short- and medium-chain fatty acids
(often called "medium-chain triglycerides"), including the notable "lauric
acid." Found in large quantities in both coconut and mother's milk, it appears
to have strong anti-fungal and anti-microbial properties and may safeguard us
against bacteria and mold so prevalent in our food supply. She observes that, as
one-third of the world's nations in tropical areas have switched to
polyunsaturated vegetable oils, the incidence of intestinal disorders and immune
deficiency diseases has increased dramatically.
"The saturated fat scare has forced
most manufacturers to abandon these safe and healthy oils in favor of
artifically saturated, hydrogenated soybean, corn, and cottonseed oils--the
waste products of America's three biggest crops." (The first two are grown
mainly for livestock feed; as much as 80-95% of these crops go to fatten up our
animals, not to sustain hungry humans.) And according to Russell Jaffe, M.D., a
noted medical researcher, cottonseed oil--which, not being considered a food
crop, may be heavily sprayed with toxic pesticides-- contains toxic fatty acids
similar to those in the rapeseed oil that was taken off the market 30 years ago
after being suspected of causing several deaths. Cottonseed oil is cheap and
plays a widespread role in the food industry, commonly used to fry potato chips
and in (often times hydrogenated) baked and processed items.
UP IN SMOKE
The medical community is aware of a
rare fatal degenerative disease called Adrenoleukodystrophy (ADL), which is
caused by long-chain fatty acids (c22 to c28) building up and eventually
destroying the protective sheath (myelin) surrounding our nerves. Canola falls
into this category, being a c22 long-chain fatty acid. In addition, it
potentially degenerates into dangerous trans-fatty acids when heated above 320
degrees Fahrenheit, which always occurs during commercial processing. Despite
manufacturer claims that their product is "expeller-pressed" or "cold-pressed,"
(meaning no external heat source was applied), very high temperatures are still
generated by the machinery and cause extensive damage. Even "lightly refined"
canola oil is subjected to most of the chemical processing steps applied to
regular grocery store oils, the main difference being that chemical solvents
aren't used to extract the oil from the seeds, and that preservatives and
defoamers aren't added.
Those who will defend Canola may bring
attention to the fact that the Chinese and Indians have used for centuries with
no ill effects, but according to Udo Erasmus ("FATS THAT HEAL, FATS THAT KILL"),
their oils were in an unrefined form, which makes a world of difference.
However, according to an article in the Wall Street Journal on June 7, 1995 by
Amal Kumar Maj, smoke emitted from rapeseed oil used for stir frying in China
was found to emit carcinogenic chemicals, increasing the incidence of lung
cancer in that country. And an ABC news report broad-cast on Feb. 15, 1994 aired
results of a medical study which confirmed a definite link between the
consumption of Canola and Soy oils and the development of prostrate cancer in
men.
John Thomas, author of "YOUNG AGAIN:
HOW TO REVERSE THE AGING PROCESS,"
is another opinionated health activist
who sees no need to mince words. "Rape is the MOST (emphasis is his) toxic of
all food plants...a toxic weed...deadly poisonous...does NOT belong in the
body." Thomas argues that its tendency to form latex-like substances causes
agglutination (clumping or sticking together) of the red blood corpuscles,
thereby resulting in congested blood flow throughout the body and an
antagonizing of the central and peripheral nervous systems. He claims that hair
loss, anemia, constipation, irritability, pulmonary emphysema, respiratory
distress, glaucoma and even blindness may be the result for both animals and
humans consuming Canola oil.
Yes, baldness. Due to starvation of
the scalp's cells due to inadequate blood and lymph flow and poor removal of
accumulated wastes. Yes, blindness. From tissue death similarly due to reduced
circulation. "Agglutinated blood corpuscles CANNOT squeeze through the extremely
tiny capillaries of the posterior eye and therefore cannot deliver oxygen to the
mitochondria. When they die, the cells die and the tissues of the retina
atrophy...Loss of vision IS a known characteristic side effect of canola
oil."
But the worst isn't over. Thomas goes
on to explain several more constituents of Canola oil that wreck havoc on our
well-being. Large amounts of "iso-thio-cyanates," or cyanide-containing
compounds, inhibit the mitochondrial production of ATP (Adenosine Triphosphate),
the energy molecule that fuels the bio-electric body and keeps us
young.
It is rich in "Glycosides," as well,
which interfere with biochemistry. (In rattlesnake venom, it is this ingredient
that inhibits your muscle enzymes and causes instant immobilization.) He claims
that both canola and soy oils act as inhibitors of our metabolic enzymes by
binding to their active sites and blocking activity. Additionally, the organic
alcohols they contain depress the immune system by causing our "white blood cell
defense system--the T-cells--to go into a stupor and fall asleep on the
job...Canola alcohols are extremely 'PURE' and far more toxic than man-made
fermented products--even hard liquors." All in all, he feels the astronomical
onslaught of these oils from processed psuedo-foods is causing a pile-up of
biological insults, accelerating our descent into premature old age. (Since John
Thomas' book is not footnoted and makes no scientific references, his intriguing
statements no doubt demand further investigation.)
SWIMMING IN THE GENE
POOL
As biotechnology extends its greedy
tentacles into almost every imaginable crevice of the food supply, applications
to the further improvement of the Canola crop were inevitable. During the
mid-1980's, the International Development Research Centre began funding agricultural projects in which Canadian, Chinese, and Egyptian scientists began
collaborating on the exchange of germplasm to create a new hybrid seed
(available to Canadian farmers in 1995) with promising advantages: crop yield
increases, disease-resistance, shorter growth cycles, and the ability to adapt
to conditions in countries (India, Ethiopia) that could not before support it.
Also on the agenda are several new genetically-engineered strains of B.t.
(Bacillus thuringiensis), an effective, natural, biological pest control agent
used to protect Canada's fields of Canola. Harmful only to certain insects,
though not to people, animals, or the environment (going on the assumption that
bugs are not part of the "environment"), the new strains are being specifically
developed for use in different climates and against a wider range of insect
species. Long-term implications are frightening, however, according to Dr.
Joseph Cummins, Professor Emeritus of Genetics, University of Western Ontario:
"It has been shown in the laboratory that genetic recombination will create
highly virulent new viruses from such constructions. Modified viruses could
cause famine by destroying crops or cause human and animal diseases of
tremendous power."
The genetic modification of
agricultural commodities is almost exclusively a money-making venture, although
claims are to the opposite.
Regardless of the fact that the vast
majority of consumers (85%) have made it clear in surveys that they prefer
gene-altered foods be labeled so they may avoid purchasing and eating them,
farmers, food processors, and multinational pharmaceutical/chemical companies
are plowing their biotech steamroller right through the kitchens of those
keeping them in business. Bruce Dalgarno, President of the Canadian Canola
Growers Association, in the press release dated April 18, 1997, notes that both
"the CCGA and grower group boards have passed motions supporting the development
of novel trait canola, including herbicide-resistant varieties," also providing
guidance to government and corporate scientists.
However, health, ecology, and consumer
advocate organizations such as THE PURE FOOD CAMPAIGN and FOOD AND WATER know
big business too well to buy all the hype or to trust the glib tongue and
pat-on-the-back approach of their slick public relations campaigns that there is
nothing to worry about. A growing number doctors, microbiologists, and genetic
experts are jumping on the bandwagon, greatly concerned about the potentially
devastating effects of tampering with, rearranging, and attempting to fool
Mother Nature. Various field and medical research has already demonstrated some
of their fears to be true, including adverse health reactions (including
allergies) and rampant, uncontrollable biological pollution of
ecosystems.
Brian Tokar, a Harvard biophysicist
and Food and Water's Biotechnology Consultant, points to one sure indicator that
behind the corporate, well-intentioned, Cheshire cat humanitarian facade
crouches a beast of purely economic incentive: "For years, the $50 billion
biotechnology industry has claimed that their new genetic technologies are going
to feed the world, relieve population pressures, cure all the deadliest
diseases, etc. The reality, unfortunately, is very different...The single most
popular area of research has been for chemical companies to try to engineer
crops that are resistant to their own brand of herbicide." True enough when it
comes to Canola. Monsanto and Hoechst/AgrEvo are both experimenting with
varieties that would be able to withstand high doses of two deadly weed killers:
Glufosinate and Glyphosate. Bacteria genes would be inserted into Hoechst's
variety to achieve this result. Along the same lines, Calgene's "Laurical"
canola (approved for sale by the USDA and FDA in 1995 for use in soap and food
products) has been shot up with bacteria and virus genes as well, in addition to
California bay, turnip, and rape.
Canola was introduced to the masses as
a magic bullet, another quick-fix solution to so many health problems we dig
ourselves into with our knife and fork. Now it appears that government and
industry may have been profiteers firing blanks, making a whole lotta noise so
we would flock in droves to the Canola circus. Once again, we must become our
own detectives. As Roger Bacon once wrote: "Since the days of revelation, the
same four corrupting errors have been made over and over again: submission to
faulty and unworthy authority; submission to what it was customary to believe;
submission to prejudicies of the mob; and worst of all, concealment of ignorance
by a false show of unheld knowledge, for no other reason than pride."
_____
FRANKENCROPS AND BIODEVASTATION:
CANOLA AND OTHER GENETICALLY ENGINEERED FOODS
By Janet Allen
<janetplanet1@earthlink.net c. 2000 All Rights Reserved
This article is a continuation on the
subject of two previous columns published in the California Sun: In the
February/March 1998 issue, we investigated the development and manipulation of
canola as a food crop, how it was incorporated into the human diet on a grand
commercial scale, and researched claims about some negative health effects that
are not generally publicized. In the June 1998 issue, we explored additional
scientific and medical research along these lines, as well as watching how
biotechnology and genetic modification had succeeded in extending their greedy
tentacles into almost every imaginable crevice of the world,s food supply. We
will now delve deeper into the matter of genetically engineered organisms
(GMO,s) and the irreverent push by corporations to force them down the throats
of an unwilling public.
LAYING DOWN THE LAW OF THE LAND When
we left off, the battle over the labeling and safety testing of biotech foods
had reached a new level of intensity in the United States when a coalition of 31
highly visible environmental, farming, and scientific organizations filed a
formal legal petition to the Environmental Protection Agency on September 16,
1997. Groups including Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, the International Federation
of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), and the Institute for Agriculture and
Trade Policy charged the federal agency with gross negligence over its approval
of genetically engineered crops, calling for their removal from the market, as
well as fundamental changes in the U.S.,s presently lax regulatory laws
governing these agricultural products. The EPA failed to give a substantive
response within the following 90-day answer period, providing an opportunity for
further action. In a resounding shot over the bow of the biotech establishment
and the Clinton administration, attorneys from the International Center for
Technology Assessment (ICTA) filed a comprehensive lawsuit on behalf of
consumers, scientists, environmentalists, chefs, and religious groups to force
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to require mandatory labeling and
adequate safety testing of all genetically engineered foods and crops. The
lawsuit was announced at a well-attended press conference in Washington, D.C. on
May 27, 1998.
According to Andrew Kimbrell,
Executive Director of ICTA and co-counsel on the case, "The FDA has placed
interests of a handful of biotechnology companies ahead of their responsibility
to protect public healthThe agency has made consumers unknowing guinea pigs for
potentially harmful, unregulated substances. According to ICTA attorney Joseph
Mendelsohn, current FDA and USDA labeling policies not only ignore public
surveys concluding that 90% of American consumers want mandatory labeling of
GMO,s, but also blatantly contradict federal laws. For example, the "Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act mandates the labeling of "materially altered foods such as
those exposed to nuclear radiation. What,s more, the lawsuit calls attention to
the fact that current "no labeling policies constitute a violation of many
Americans, spiritual and religious beliefs, posing a significant threat to
religious freedom and ethical choice. Segments of the population including Jews,
Muslims, Seventh-Day Adventists, and vegetarians need to avoid foods which
contain substances derived from animals, whose genes are currently being
inserted into the DNA of numerous vegetable and grain crops. (Genetic material
from pigs have been inserted into spinach, human genes into pigs, fish genes
into tomatoes, firefly genes into tobacco, and bacteria and virus genes into
numerous crops.) Additionally, genetic pollution of the environment,
irreversible reduction of the diversity of the world,s most significant food
crops, and an upsetting of the balance of numerous ecosystems could very likely
be the untimely legacy of this technology out-of-control. Greenpeace,s
BenediktHaerlin is convinced that an all-out ban is our one saving grace.
"Regulators around the world are well aware of this problem, but have not dared
to draw the necessary conclusions. Instead, they have agreed to the thoroughly
inadequate voluntary resistance management, presented by the chemical industry.
The genetic modification of agricultural commodities is almost exclusively a
money-making venture, although claims are to the opposite. Regardless of the
fact that the vast majority of consumers (85%) have made it clear in surveys
that they prefer gene-altered foods be labeled so they may avoid purchasing and
eating them, farmers, food processors, and multinational pharmaceutical/chemical
companies are plowing their biotech steamroller right through the kitchens of
those keeping them in business. Bruce Dalgarno, President of the Canadian Canola
Growers Association, in the press release dated April 18, 1997, notes that both
"the CCGA and grower group boards have passed motions supporting the development
of novel trait canola, including herbicide-resistant varieties," also providing
guidance to government and corporate scientists. However, health, ecology, and
consumer advocate organizations such as THE PURE FOOD CAMPAIGN and FOOD AND
WATER know big business too well to buy all the hype or to trust the glib tongue
and pat-on-the-back approach of their slick public relations campaigns that
there is nothing to worry about. A growing number of doctors, microbiologists,
and genetic experts are jumping on the bandwagon, greatly concerned about the
potentially devastating effects of tampering with, rearranging, and attempting
to fool Mother Nature. A variety of field and medical research has already
demonstrated some of their fears to be true, including adverse health reactions
(including allergies) and rampant, uncontrollable biological pollution of
ecosystems. Brian Tokar, a Harvard biophysicist and Food and Water's
Biotechnology Consultant, points to one sure indicator that behind the
corporate, well-intentioned, Cheshire cat humanitarian facade crouches a beast
of purely economic incentive: "For years, the $50 billion biotechnology industry
has claimed that their new genetic technologies are going to feed the world,
relieve population pressures, cure all the deadliest diseases, etc. The reality,
unfortunately, is very different ...The single most popular area of research has
been for chemical companies to try to engineer crops that are resistant to their
own brand of herbicide." True enough when it comes to Canola. Monsanto and
Hoechst/AgrEvo are both experimenting with varieties that would be able to
withstand high doses of two deadly weed killers: Glufosinate and Glyphosate.
Bacteria genes would be inserted into Hoechst's variety to achieve this result.
Along the same lines, Calgene's "Laurical" canola (approved for sale by the USDA
and FDA in 1995 for use in soap and food products) has been shot up with
bacteria and virus genes as well, in addition to California bay, turnip, and
rape.
BLUE GENES
Critics and watchdogs of the
speeding-out-of-control biotech and genetic engineering industries have long
felt that they are disasters waiting to happen. Aldous Huxley forecast problems
in his 1932 book BRAVE NEW WORLD, while Erwin Chargoff (eminent biochemist and
Father of molecular biology) categorized such technologies as a "Molecular
Auschwitz. In his book HERACLITEAN FIRE, he notes the "awesome irreversibility
of genetic experi- mentation and warns that this technology poses a greater
threat than the advent of nuclear science. He writes, "I have the feeling that
science has transgressed a barrier that should have remained inviolate. You
cannot recall a new form of life. A severe shortage of legislation demanding
government regulatory and enforcement agencies, strict fines, and codes of
ethics has all too often left the fox guarding the henhouse in numerous
enterprises, inviting widespread neglect and abuse of potentially harmful
technologies. The corporate "Hall of Shame within the food irradiation industry
is lengthy enough to fill a roll of toilet paper, and there,s little chance of
wiping that slate clean when it comes to the biotech bulletin board. Already,
the evidence of dangerous carelessness has started to roll in, with Canola
topping the bill. On April 18, 1997, the St. Louis POST-DISPATCH carried the
story (only 84 words long, under a confusing headline, and buried deep in a news
wrap-up column on the business page) of Monsanto,s discreet recall of "small
quantities of a genetically engineered Canola seed containing an unapproved gene
that had gotten into the product by mistake. However, Canadian government
officials claimed the amount was not small, as 60,000 bag units of two different
varieties (sufficient to seed some 60,000 to 750,000 acres of land) had to be
retrieved. Some had already been planted when Monsanto discovered the error,
which apparently had gone undetected for a substantial period of time. The
recalled "Roundup Ready Canola was genetically manipulated to withstand
increased spraying with Monsanto,s billion-dollar herbicide, glyphosate,
marketed under the trade name Roundup. This agricultural wonder product is
responsible for a large proportion of the chemical giant,s annual profits, being
utilized by farmers and backyard gardeners alike to kill weeds. Ordinarily, it
is so lethal to the plants that it must be used more sparingly, but Monsanto,
with its eye on boosting sales, found a way to allow plants to be douse with
many times the usual dose. Inserting the wrong gene configuration into a
commercial product is precisely the kind of catastrophe that opponents have been
predicting for a decade. Despite proponent,s insistence that such mistakes could
never happen due to rigorous quality-assurance programs and tight government
regulations, this incident proves a more threatening scenario: That the system
is a failure and our safety is at risk. If this could happen in Canada, where
stricter controls are in place, it could definitely occur in the United States
at some future date. Limagrain Canada Seeds, Inc. of Saskatchewan, which was
selling the Canola seeds under license, appeared to blame Monsanto squarely for
the mistake. Company spokesperson Gary Bauman explained that only Monsanto, who
possesses the expertise to detect genetic differences, could have discovered the
apparent contamination. In addition, tracing the exact origin of the error will
be difficult this late in the game, because the seeds now available for testing
are progeny (offspring) of the originals. "We may never know how it
happened.
Small comfort from the scientific
experts we are asked to trust. With our food, with our health, with our lives,
with our future. _____
For more information, please contact:
PURE FOOD CAMPAIGN: (310)399-9355; (800)253-0681 Website: www.purefood.org TEN
SPEED PRESS (Dr. Lee Hitchcox): (800)841-BOOK PLEXUS PRESS (John Thomas):
(800)659-1882 or 1885
http://www.quantumbalancing.com/news/canola.htm
http://www.quantumbalancing.com/news/canola.htm
