轉(zhuǎn)基因食品到底有沒有害？聽聽美國醫(yī)生怎么說
　　蔣高明
　　筆者最近發(fā)表或轉(zhuǎn)載了對轉(zhuǎn)基因作物商業(yè)化種植的多篇質(zhì)疑文章，受到大部分網(wǎng)友的熱烈響應(yīng)，也遭到少數(shù)轉(zhuǎn)基因擁護(hù)者的人身攻擊。魯迅說過，謾罵不是戰(zhàn)斗。要有利于問題澄清，需要拿出理智的數(shù)據(jù)來，或多寫一些客觀公正的科普文章，讓公眾有判斷的能力。
　　任何東西有利也有害，老祖宗造“利害”這個詞匯的時候，利在前，害就在其后的。支持轉(zhuǎn)基因的人只說好處不說害處是不科學(xué)的；反對轉(zhuǎn)基因者只說害處不說好處也同樣不是科學(xué)的態(tài)度?，F(xiàn)在的問題是，支持轉(zhuǎn)基因主糧商業(yè)化的專家，只字不提它的負(fù)面作用，對其問題是筆者學(xué)宏觀生物學(xué)即生態(tài)學(xué)的人提出來的，可能有些觀點是說不到點子上去的，還需學(xué)眾多專家不斷完善補(bǔ)充。任何事情都是有矛盾的，有正就有反，有天就有地，有男就有女，有好處也有害處，有轉(zhuǎn)基因就有反轉(zhuǎn)基因。而轉(zhuǎn)基因的邏輯就是與生態(tài)的邏輯相反的，因此，生態(tài)學(xué)家來質(zhì)疑就是十分正常的事情；同樣的道理，生物技術(shù)專家來質(zhì)疑生態(tài)學(xué)家的做法也是正常的。
　　當(dāng)然，我們渴望轉(zhuǎn)基因的人自己指出轉(zhuǎn)基因主糧商業(yè)化種植的缺點來。這個缺點與優(yōu)點比較一下，還值不值得國家推廣？而不能為了推廣，有意不說該技術(shù)的問題。關(guān)于轉(zhuǎn)基因作物的一些潛在風(fēng)險，筆者從歐美發(fā)達(dá)國家聽到的聲音最多，幾乎沒有中國科學(xué)的家的證據(jù)，這似乎是不正常的。在轉(zhuǎn)基因主糧問題上，畢竟中國是第一個吃螃蟹的，多一些爭議可能是好的。真理是不怕辯論的。
　　其中一個雙方都不能說清楚的問題是，轉(zhuǎn)基因食物對人體到底有沒有影響？是不是真的像有些專家說的那樣“蟲子不能吃，人可以放心吃”；普通人需要“吃轉(zhuǎn)基因稻米657年”才可能吃出問題來呢？讓我們來聽聽美國醫(yī)生怎么說。
　　當(dāng)然，筆者但愿這篇文章是美國人為了阻礙中國轉(zhuǎn)基因事業(yè)發(fā)展，是別有用心的偽造出來的。中國科學(xué)家一向迷信美國的，如果這是真的，需要有個說法，需要中國的醫(yī)學(xué)界來判斷，文中的觀點是不是在忽悠人？
　　這篇文章來自網(wǎng)絡(luò)  http://www.rense.com/general86/doct.htm，本博轉(zhuǎn)的是中文譯稿。

醫(yī)生警告：避開轉(zhuǎn)基因食品
作者杰弗里·史密斯 Jeffrey M. Smith

　　美國科學(xué)院環(huán)境醫(yī)學(xué)指出：“轉(zhuǎn)基因食品沒有得到很好的測試，并造成嚴(yán)重的健康風(fēng)險。轉(zhuǎn)基因食品和健康的不利影響之間不是了無關(guān)系的，實則存在因果的關(guān)系?！?BR>　　今年5月，美國科學(xué)與環(huán)境醫(yī)學(xué)會（AAEM）呼吁“可能的話，醫(yī)生要教育病人，醫(yī)療界，和市民大眾，避免轉(zhuǎn)基因（基因改造）食品，及提供有關(guān)轉(zhuǎn)基因食品和健康風(fēng)險的教育材料。”他們呼吁暫停食用轉(zhuǎn)基因食品，作一個長期的獨立研究和作食物標(biāo)簽。
　　AAEM的立場文件中指出，“一些用動物的研究指出食用轉(zhuǎn)基因食品有嚴(yán)重健康的風(fēng)險?！卑ú挥?，免疫問題，加速老化，胰島素的調(diào)節(jié)，和主要臟腑及胃腸系統(tǒng)的改變。他們得出結(jié)論：“轉(zhuǎn)基因食品和健康的不利影響之間不是了無關(guān)系的，實則存在著因果的關(guān)系?！币钥茖W(xué)公認(rèn)的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)性定義： “轉(zhuǎn)基因食品和疾病兩者之間的緊密聯(lián)系和一致性，在多次動物研究中已被證實?！?BR>　　越來越多的醫(yī)生已經(jīng)處方無轉(zhuǎn)基因食物（給病人）。密歇根州的內(nèi)科專家的艾米院長院士，又是董事會成員的AAEM，說：“我強(qiáng)烈建議病人完全食用非轉(zhuǎn)基因食品。”俄亥俄州過敏癥專家約翰博伊斯博士說：“我過去一直測試大豆引起的過敏，但現(xiàn)在（測試）的是轉(zhuǎn)基因大豆，這種大豆是非常危險的，我告訴人們不要吃它。”
　　身為AAEM主席的珍妮阿姆斯朗博士，說：“醫(yī)生可能在病人身上看到這些影響，但需要知道如何提出正確的問題?！笔澜缰飳W(xué)家普什帕米巴爾加更進(jìn)一步，他在審查了600多個科學(xué)期刊，他得出結(jié)論認(rèn)為：轉(zhuǎn)基因生物（GMOs）是令至美國人健康急劇惡化的一大因素。
　　索爾克研究所的生物學(xué)家戴維舒伯特警告說，“在人口中，兒童是最有可能受到毒素和其它與轉(zhuǎn)基因食品有關(guān)的飲食問題所傷害到。”。他說，“在沒有足夠的研究下，孩子們就成了“作為實驗的動物?！?BR>　　真正用轉(zhuǎn)基因食物喂飼實驗中的動物的經(jīng)歷，實在是叫人害怕的。當(dāng)用基因大豆喂雌性大鼠，它們大多數(shù)的嬰兒在三個星期內(nèi)死亡，與用天然大豆喂食的大鼠作比較的話，它的死亡率就有10％的高。轉(zhuǎn)基因食物喂養(yǎng)的嬰兒亦較細(xì)小，后來懷孕也有問題出現(xiàn)。
　　當(dāng)雄性老鼠喂食轉(zhuǎn)基因大豆后，其睪丸實際上改變了顏色：從粉紅色的正常色轉(zhuǎn)至深藍(lán)色。老鼠喂食轉(zhuǎn)基因大豆就已經(jīng)改變了年輕的精子。甚至是用轉(zhuǎn)基因食物喂養(yǎng)的母鼠體內(nèi)的胚胎的基因（DNA）亦有重大的改變。奧地利政府用老鼠喂食轉(zhuǎn)基因玉米的研究，也發(fā)現(xiàn)它們所產(chǎn)的下一代不但數(shù)量少，而且體形也小于正常的幼鼠。
　　生殖問題也困擾著牲畜。印度在哈里亞納邦的調(diào)查表明，大多數(shù)吃了轉(zhuǎn)基因棉籽的水牛有并發(fā)癥，如早產(chǎn)，流產(chǎn)，不育，并子宮脫垂。許多小牛死亡。在美國，大約24個農(nóng)民報告說成千上萬只豬吃了轉(zhuǎn)基因玉米品種后成了不能生殖的，一些服用后出現(xiàn)假懷孕，有的生下袋水。奶牛和公牛進(jìn)食了相同的玉米也成為不育。
　　為產(chǎn)生毒素而設(shè)計的食物
　　在每個細(xì)胞中，轉(zhuǎn)基因玉米和棉花已被策劃設(shè)計生產(chǎn)出自己內(nèi)置的農(nóng)藥。當(dāng)蟲咬（轉(zhuǎn)基因）植物時，（植物）內(nèi)里的毒會令它的胃裂開而至死。生物技術(shù)公司聲稱，被稱為Bt（這是從土壤細(xì)菌叫蘇云金芽孢桿菌生的）的農(nóng)藥，有一個安全使用的歷史，因為有機(jī)農(nóng)民和其它農(nóng)民也使用Bt細(xì)菌噴霧控制自然害蟲。然而，由轉(zhuǎn)基因植物被設(shè)計出來的Bt毒素，比在自然噴霧中的Bt毒素，濃度是要大幾千倍，有過敏原體的特性，不像噴霧，不能從植物中洗除掉。
　　此外，研究證實，即使是毒性較低的天然細(xì)菌噴霧也是有害的。當(dāng)為了殺死在西北太平洋地區(qū)上空的『吉普賽飛蛾』，而用飛機(jī)散播噴霧時，約有500人報導(dǎo)說出現(xiàn)過敏或類似流感的癥狀，有些人更要入急診室。在印度的各地農(nóng)場上的工人，在處理Bt棉花上，現(xiàn)在出現(xiàn)了完全相同的癥狀。 2008年，根據(jù)醫(yī)療記錄，『星期日印度』報告，說“由BT棉的種植而導(dǎo)至的瘙癢受害者，正大量地增加?！?BR>　　美國科學(xué)與環(huán)境醫(yī)學(xué)指出：“多項動物研究顯示出重大的免疫調(diào)節(jié)失調(diào)，”包括細(xì)胞激素（cytokines）的增加，它們又與哮喘，過敏和發(fā)炎有關(guān)，都在美國節(jié)節(jié)上升。
　　根據(jù)轉(zhuǎn)基因食品安全專家阿帕德普茲泰博士，在所有的研究中，轉(zhuǎn)基因動物的免疫狀況改變，是“一貫的特點?！奔词埂好仙蕉肌蛔约旱难芯恳脖砻鳎築t玉米喂養(yǎng)的大鼠的免疫系統(tǒng)有著顯著的改變。由意大利政府于2008年11月所作的研究，亦發(fā)現(xiàn)老鼠的免疫對Bt玉米有反應(yīng)。
　　轉(zhuǎn)基因大豆和玉米每一個包含兩個具有過敏性質(zhì)的新蛋白質(zhì)，轉(zhuǎn)基因大豆有高達(dá)7倍以上的胰蛋白酶抑制劑，是已知大豆過敏原。皮膚點刺試驗表明有些人對轉(zhuǎn)基因有反應(yīng)，而對非轉(zhuǎn)基因大豆沒有反應(yīng)。轉(zhuǎn)基因大豆被首次進(jìn)入英國后不久，大豆過敏急升了50％。也許美國流行著食物過敏和哮喘是一種遺傳基因操縱的結(jié)果。
　　在印度，一直以來，當(dāng)棉花收獲后，動物采食其植物。但是，當(dāng)有牧羊人讓其羊群吃轉(zhuǎn)基因棉花植株（內(nèi)有Bt），數(shù)以千計的羊死亡。驗尸結(jié)果顯示腸和肝臟有過嚴(yán)重的刺激和黑色像補(bǔ)丁的小塊（以及擴(kuò)大了的膽管）。調(diào)查人員說，初步證據(jù)顯示出“有力地表明，羊的死亡率是由于毒素，極可能是轉(zhuǎn)Bt毒素（所造成）?！痹诘赂砂l(fā)展協(xié)會的一個小的后續(xù)跟進(jìn)的喂養(yǎng)試驗行動中，所有喂過Bt轉(zhuǎn)基棉植物的羊30天內(nèi)全部死亡，而那些吃天然棉花植物的羊保持健康。
　　在安得拉邦的一個小村莊里，那里的水牛吃棉花植物8年沒有發(fā)生任何事件。在2008年1月3日，水牛首次吃了含有Bt棉花的植物后，所有13只水牛第二天便生病了，跟著3天內(nèi)全部死亡。 Bt玉米也牽涉在德國母牛的死亡，和菲律賓的馬，水牛，和雞的死亡中。
　　在實驗室研究中，很多雞喂了『自由鏈接』（Liberty Link）玉米死亡，20個中有7只喂食轉(zhuǎn)基因西紅柿的大鼠發(fā)展出胃出血，另外40只中有 7只兩個星期內(nèi)死亡。根據(jù)法國毒物學(xué)家G.E.Seralini，『孟山都』自已的研究亦證明，Bt玉米喂養(yǎng)的大鼠，其主要內(nèi)臟有中毒的現(xiàn)象。
　　最令人憂心的調(diào)查結(jié)果：所有轉(zhuǎn)基因生物殘留在內(nèi)我們體內(nèi)
　　唯一已公布的入體喂食轉(zhuǎn)基因的研究顯示出轉(zhuǎn)基因食物中可能是最危險的問題。插入到轉(zhuǎn)基因大豆里的基因轉(zhuǎn)移到生活在我們腸道的細(xì)菌的DNA里面去，并繼續(xù)發(fā)揮作用。這意味著吃了之后，我們雖然不吃轉(zhuǎn)基因食物，在我們體內(nèi)仍然不斷產(chǎn)生有潛在之害的基因蛋白質(zhì)。說透徹一點，吃Bt玉米所造成的玉米片，會把我們的腸道細(xì)菌轉(zhuǎn)變成生活著的農(nóng)藥制造廠，可能直至我們死為止。
　　當(dāng)在美國的各地的醫(yī)療會議宣告基因轉(zhuǎn)移的證據(jù)時，醫(yī)生們往往響應(yīng)他們的病人在過去十年中，有著大幅增加的胃腸道的問題。轉(zhuǎn)基因食品可能正在北美人民的肚子中殖民了。
　　科學(xué)家，即使在90年代初，已在美國食品和藥物管理局（FDA）提出對所有這些問題的警告。根據(jù)從一起訴訟所公布的文件，該機(jī)構(gòu)的科學(xué)共識是：轉(zhuǎn)基因食品是有內(nèi)在的危險，并可能制造出難以檢測的過敏，毒藥，基因轉(zhuǎn)移到腸道菌群，新的疾病和營養(yǎng)問題。他們敦促他們的上司，要求做嚴(yán)格的長期測試。但是，白宮下令該機(jī)構(gòu)要促進(jìn)生物技術(shù)，藥物管理局作出反應(yīng)，招募了邁克爾泰勒，孟山都的前律師，來領(lǐng)導(dǎo)形成轉(zhuǎn)基因的政策。這一政策，也就是在今天實行的政策，否認(rèn)了科學(xué)家關(guān)注上的共知（即上面那些共知點），并宣布，任何轉(zhuǎn)基因生物安全性的研究都是不需要的，食品的安全與否全由孟山都和其它生物技術(shù)公司來決定。泰勒先生后來成為孟山都的副總裁。
　　美國科學(xué)與環(huán)境醫(yī)學(xué)指出：“轉(zhuǎn)基因食品沒有得到正確的測試”和“造成嚴(yán)重的健康風(fēng)險?！睕]有一個人類的臨床轉(zhuǎn)基因生物試驗的報告被出版過。在2007年出版的科學(xué)文獻(xiàn)在“潛在的毒性作用/轉(zhuǎn)基因植物的健康風(fēng)險”的評論文獻(xiàn)中透露“實驗的數(shù)據(jù)是非常的不足夠?！弊髡咴谠u論中用詢問作結(jié)論：“有哪里的科學(xué)證據(jù)去證明，正如生物技術(shù)公司自己所假設(shè)的一樣：轉(zhuǎn)基因植物/食物的毒性是安全的呢？”
　　加拿大著名的遺傳學(xué)家戴維鈴木就此事作回應(yīng)：“實驗根本就沒有做，我們現(xiàn)在已成為小白鼠?！彼a(bǔ)充說，“任何人說，噢，我們知道這是絕對安全的。我會說：要么就是令人難以置信的愚蠢，或故意地在說謊?！?BR>　　舒伯特博士指出，“如果有問題，我們可能永遠(yuǎn)不會知道，因為事情的源頭不可能追查得到，許多疾病是需要很長的時間才發(fā)展起來的?！比绻D(zhuǎn)基因生物（GMOs）引起急性的癥狀而帶有一個獨特的簽名，那么也許我們會有機(jī)會追查得到原因。
　　例子就如發(fā)生在美國80年代后期的一場流行性疾病。疾病迅速展開，致命的，造成了一個在血液中獨特的可衡量的變化，但還仍花了四年多的時間，去確定是否發(fā)生疫情。到那時，它已殺了大約100個美國人，造成5,000-10,000人生病、或成為終身的殘疾。這場流行性疾病是由基因工程制造的，是補(bǔ)充食品品牌名為L -色氨酸所引起的。
　　如果其它基因改造食物是引至自閉癥，肥胖癥，糖尿病，哮喘，癌癥，心臟病，過敏，生殖問題的增加，或任何其它常見而且現(xiàn)正困擾美國人健康的問題，我們可能永遠(yuǎn)不會知道。事實上，由于轉(zhuǎn)基因生物的喂養(yǎng)有這樣多種多樣的問題，易感染的人群會作出對轉(zhuǎn)基因食品的多種病癥。因此，清楚了，在1996年第一次大規(guī)模引進(jìn)轉(zhuǎn)基因作物的9年后，患有3個或以上的慢性疾病的人，幾乎增加了一倍，從7％至13％。
　　為了幫助確定是否轉(zhuǎn)基因生物造成危害，AAEM要求他們的“成員，醫(yī)學(xué)界和獨立的科學(xué)界，收集有關(guān)轉(zhuǎn)基因食品的食用和對健康的影響的資料個案，開始調(diào)查轉(zhuǎn)基因食品對人類健康所化演的角色和安全的流行病學(xué)的研究，和進(jìn)行確定轉(zhuǎn)基因食品對人體健康影響的安全方法?！?BR>　　市民可以采納醫(yī)生的建議，避開轉(zhuǎn)基因食品，而不必等待出來的結(jié)果。人們可遠(yuǎn)離任何大豆或玉米與衍生物，棉籽和油菜籽油，糖的轉(zhuǎn)基因甜菜，除非它說：『有機(jī)』或“非轉(zhuǎn)基因?！?BR>　　就算一小部分人選擇了非轉(zhuǎn)基因品牌，食品工業(yè)可能會如他們響應(yīng)歐洲時一樣，就是移除所有的基因改造成分。因此，美國科學(xué)與環(huán)境醫(yī)學(xué)的非轉(zhuǎn)基因處方，對于美國的食品供應(yīng)，可能是一個分水嶺。
　　杰弗里·史密斯，是Institute for Responsible Technology的行政總裁，是對轉(zhuǎn)基因生物的健康危險的領(lǐng)先的發(fā)言人。他的第一本書，種子的欺騙，是說及這領(lǐng)域世界上最暢銷的一本書。他的第二本，遺傳輪盤：記錄的健康風(fēng)險的轉(zhuǎn)基因食品，確定了65種轉(zhuǎn)基因生物的風(fēng)險，并顯示政府如何膚淺的批準(zhǔn)和沒有能力找到他們。他邀請生物技術(shù)產(chǎn)業(yè)對每一個風(fēng)險作出書面證據(jù)的答復(fù)，但正確預(yù)測他們會拒絕接受，因為他們沒有數(shù)據(jù)顯示，其產(chǎn)品是安全的。
　　本文引用地址： http://www.sciencenet.cn/m/user_content.aspx?id=294175

附英文原文：

　　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 <http://www.reliabletechnology.org>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; [email protected]; <http://www.aaemonline.org>www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html. 
　　http://www.sentienttimes.com/09/June_July_09/doctors.html

× 烏有之鄉(xiāng) WYZXWK.COM

您的打賞將用于網(wǎng)站日常運行與維護(hù)。
幫助我們辦好網(wǎng)站，宣傳紅色文化！

歡迎掃描下方二維碼，訂閱烏有之鄉(xiāng)網(wǎng)刊微信公眾號