El Ministerio de Agricultura de China acusado de complicidad con Monsanto
Por la Dra. Mae-Wan Ho, 15 de junio de 2015
(Foto: 24horas.cl)
El Ministerio de Agricultura de China ha sido acusado de permitir la importación de soja y maíz transgénicos tolerantes a Roundup para su comercialización en el mercado chino, sin pruebas de seguridad, con falsos permisos, falsificación de las muestras y falsos informes de pruebas de seguridad. Los ciudadanos chinos han solicitado una reorganización de este Ministerio, dice la Dra. Mae-Wan Ho.
Puede firmar el Manifiesto de científicos independientes sobre el glifosato, en el que se solicita a los Gobiernos que prohíban la pulverización de glifosato, basándose en la gran cantidad de evidencias que muestran el daño que produce. Puede hacerlo aquí: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/
Ciudadanos chinos solicitan a la Oficina legislativa del Gobierno la reorganización del Ministerio de Agricultura
Una petición firmada por más de 600 personas de China, se ha presentado ante la Oficina de Asuntos Legislativos del Consejo de Estado en la que alegan que el Ministerio de Agricultura ha permitido el cultivo de soja, maíz y colza transgénicos tolerantes al glifosato, que causan un daño sistemático a “las personas, los animales, las plantas, los microorganismos y el entorno ecológico, para su comercialización en China, sin confirmar que dichos productos sean seguros (1). Al contrario, el Ministerio ha actuado en connivencia con Monsanto, falsificando muestras, llevando a cabo falsas pruebas de seguridad y manipulando también las conclusiones sobre su seguridad”.
La petición dice que el Ministerio de Agricultura y el Centro de Control y Prevención de Enfermedades de China, en colaboración con Monsanto, “han engañado al Gobierno y al pueblo chino, violando el Reglamento de Administración Agrícola de Seguridad de los Transgénicos… y entiende que es un delito poner el peligro la salud pública. ( El citado Reglamento deja claro que en relación a la seguridad de los transgénicos, tiene por objeto evitar el peligro o potencial peligro causado por los transgénicos a los seres humanos, los animales, las plantas, los microorganismos y el medio ambiente)”. China, que forma parte del Convenio de las Naciones Unidas sobre la Diversidad Biológica y el Protocolo de Bioseguridad de Cartagena, debe aplicar el Protocolo en sentido estricto, que establece que ante la falta de información científica o las dudas respecto a los posibles efectos adversos de los transgénicos en la salud y el medio ambiente, no impedirá que la parte importadora tome las medidas adecuadas para reducir al mínimo los efectos adversos. El Ministerio de Agricultura ha violado descaradamente las estipulaciones recogidas en el Protocolo.
La parte más polémica de la petición dice: “Por lo tanto, debemos llevar a cabo una cirugía similar a la del cáncer: primero investigar el grado de colusión entre los funcionarios del Ministerio de Agricultura y Monsanto por haber engañado al Gobierno y al pueblo chino; segundo, llevar a cabo una reorganización y reestructuración de la dirección del Ministerio; y tercero, proceder a un cambio en el que la agricultura ecológica se entienda como la única dirección para un desarrollo sostenible de la agricultura de China”. ( ESPECTACULAR !!! NOGAL DE VIDA )
Y además: “No podemos excluir la posibilidad de que los transgénicos sean utilizados por las potencias extranjeras como parte de una guerra biológica” contra el pueblo chino. Por lo tanto, el uso de los transgénicos en la agricultura es un importante problema que afecta a la biodefensa, y no pueden ser regulados, supervisados y administrados por un solo departamento del Gobierno, como el Ministerio de Agricultura. En su lugar, debe crearse un organismo especial del Consejo de Seguridad Nacional, junto con las Instituciones de Investigación médico-militar, empresas de biodefensa y de guerra química y especialistas en la investigación de los cultivos transgénicos, así como de Inspección, salud pública y protección del medio ambiente.. ( ESPECTACULAR !!! NOGAL DE VIDA )
La petición incluye 23 anexos, que contienen las pruebas documentales para apoyar sus alegaciones sobre las irregularidades cometidas en el Ministerio de Agricultura, cuatro de los cuales están en inglés y el resto en chino. Entre los archivos adjuntos hay un conjunto de artículos científicos publicados en chino y en inglés sobre la toxicidad de los herbicidas a base de glifosato. ( ESPECTACULAR !!! NOGAL DE VIDA )
Grandes cantidades de soja transgénica importada está contaminada con residuos de glifosato
En la petición se dice que China, desde hace varios años, viene importando anualmente de entre 50 a 70 millones de toneladas de soja transgénica tolerante al glifosato contaminados con residuos de glifosato (véase [2] How Grain Self-Sufficiency, Massive GM Soybean Imports and Glyphosate Exports Led China to Devastate People and Planet, SiS 67) para la obtención de harinas de soja. La harina de soja se procesa parcialmente para uso en la alimentación animal, y por otra parte se obtienen proteínas de soja, en forma de polvo, para añadirla a las salchichas, al jamón, alimentos congelados, leche de soja, galletas, pasteles, pan e incluso a las harinas de trigo y a las leches infantiles en polvo (1). Han sido analizados los ingredientes con soja transgénica y se ha podido comprobar la presencia de residuos de glifosato en la salsa de soja, en la pasta de soja, en el tofu, etc. productos todos ellos muy consumidos por los chinos.
Cómo Monsanto ha falsificado las pruebas para obtener la aprobación de uso del glifosato y de la soja y maíz transgénicos
No sólo el Ministerio de Agricultura ignora los daños producidos por los residuos de glifosato en la soja transgénica, sino que también se ha negado a revelar cómo el herbicida Roundup de Monsanto obtuvo la aprobación para el uso de este plaguicida en China, en 1988, y cómo la soja 40-3-2 transgénica y el maíz transgénico NK603, obtuvieron también su certificado de bioseguridad por parte del Ministerio de Agricultura de China.
Parece ser que para la obtención de este certificado de comercialización de Roundup, Monsanto mintió al Gobierno chino y a los chinos. En primer lugar, Monsanto, de forma intencionada, no informó al Ministerio de Agricultura de China que este producto fue primeramente patentado como quelante, causando el deterioro de los suelos, los microorganismos, las plantas, los animales y los seres humanos. En segundo lugar, Monsanto tampoco informó alMinisterio de Agricultura que la Agencia de Protección Ambiental de Estados Unidos (EPA) ya había clasificado en 1985 al glifosato como probablemente cancerígeno. En tercer lugar, Monsanto no proporcionó los estudios a largo plazo, de por vida y durante tres generaciones, sobre la carcinogenicidad del glifosato. Y en cuarto lugar, Monsanto presento un “Informe de estudio toxicológico de Roundup expedido por Younger Laboratories el 23 de diciembre de 1985”, que tiene toda la apariencia de tratarse de un fraude descarado. Todas este comportamiento fraudulento está recogido en el Anexo 1 de la petición.
En cuanto al certificado de bioseguridad para la soja transgénica 40-3-2 y el maíz transgénico NK603, la petición alega que los dirigentes del Ministerio de Agricultura, el Centro para el Control de Enfermedades de China y Monsanto, actuaron en connivencia, tanto interna como externa, utilizaron muestras falsas, falsificaron pruebas y aportaron fraudulentos estudios de seguridad.
En primer lugar, Monsanto solicitó el certificado de bioseguridad para la soja y el maíz tolerantes al glifosato en 2004, sin que la Empresa informase al Ministerio de Agricultura de que el glifosato es un potente biocida de amplio espectro/ antibiótico, capaz de aniquilar a varios cientos de especies de microbios de la flora intestinal de los seres humanos y animales, y que había sido patentado como tal.
Monsanto presentó su solicitud de patente ante la Oficina de Patentes de Estados Unidos el 29 de agosto de 2003, siendo aprobada el 22 de abril de 2004. El documento de la patente recoge la dosis de glifosato como biocida: “En términos generales, un dosis tan pequeña como de 1 a 2 miligramos por kilogramo de peso corporal es la adecuada”.
Monsanto presentó su solicitud de patente ante la Oficina de Patentes de Estados Unidos el 29 de agosto de 2003, siendo aprobada el 22 de abril de 2004. El documento de la patente recoge la dosis de glifosato como biocida: “En términos generales, un dosis tan pequeña como de 1 a 2 miligramos por kilogramo de peso corporal es la adecuada”.
En segundo lugar, cuando Monsanto solicitó el certificado de bioseguridad para la soja y el maíz transgénicos tolerantes al glifosato en el año 2003, no informó al Ministerio de Agricultura de que el glifosato es también un acaricida, artropocida, insecticida, molusquicida y rodenticida, y como tal presentó la patente ( el 29 de agosto de 2003 en la Oficina de Patentes de Estados Unidos, concedida en 2004). La dosis para el uso indicado en la patente es la siguiente: “Uso en mamíferos y seres humanos, mediante inyección, por vía oral, anal, intravenosa, intramuscular. Generalmente, una dosis de 1 a 2 miligramos por kilogramo de peso corporal es lo adecuado”.
En tercer lugar, los responsables del Ministerio de Agricultura actuaron presuntamente en connivencia con Monsantopara obtener con rapidez los certificados de bioseguridad para la soja MON87701 resistente a los insectos y para la soja MON87701xMON89788 (Intacta RR2) resistente a los insectos y tolerante al glifosato (rasgos apilados), sin suficientes pruebas de seguridad. Y como revelan diferentes artículos publicados en la prensa, esta rápida aprobación se hizo para intentar salvar los 600.000 sacos de semillas de Intacta RR2 de Monsanto. Para evitar el conocimiento público de esta aprobación relámpago, el Ministerio de Agricultura se ha negado a hacer públicos los Informes de los estudios toxicológicos sobre seguridad alimentaria de la soja transgénica.
Por lo tanto, Monsanto y los funcionarios y científicos del Ministerio de Agricultura están acusados de “usar métodos peligrosos que pueden dañar la seguridad pública” y deben ser investigados a tal efecto.
No se ha dado ningún tipo de aprobación para la obtención de aceite y harinas de la soja transgénica para uso en la alimentación
Para empeorar aún más las cosas, de acuerdo con el Método de Gestión de la Higiene de los Alimentos transgénicos, aprobado el 1 de julio de 2002, en el Artículo 3 se establece que los alimentos transgénicos deben ser examinados y aprobados por el Ministerio de Salud antes de su producción o importación. Pero el Ministerio de Salud ha confirmado que “Nunca ha aceptado o aprobado” su uso para la obtención de aceite alimentario a partir de la soja transgénica tolerante al glifosato 40-3-2 de Monsanto, ni otros tipos de procesos de extracción química.
Del mismo modo, el Ministerio de Agricultura, en respuesta a la solicitud de información emitida el 27 de junio de 2014, ha confirmado que no ha evaluado ni aprobado la producción y venta de proteínas de soja en polvo, ni aceites elaborados a partir de la soja transgénica tolerante al glifosato de Monsanto.
Comida en los centros escolares cocinada con aceite de soja transgénica extraído químicamente
Las comidas servidas en los comedores de los centros escolares de primaria y secundaria de Beijing, subvencionados por el Gobierno, han sido cocinadas con aceite de soja transgénica extraído químicamente. Desde principios de 2011, los representantes de los estudiantes y voluntarios de seguridad alimentaria han solicitado a la Comisión de Educación de Beijing un cambio en el uso de los aceites extraídos de los productos transgénicos.
En marzo de 2012, se invitó a los representantes de los padres a mantener conversaciones con los responsables de los departamentos del Ministerio de Educación. Durante la reunión, los representantes de los padres señalaron que los documentos oficiales de la Oficina de Educación de Hangzhou, la Oficina de Educación de Wulumuqi, la Oficina de Educación de Shandong-Anqiu y la Oficina de Administración de Qingdao, solicitaban que las comidas escolares para los estudiantes debieran estar cocinadas con aceites no transgénicos. Pero un funcionario del Ministerio de Educación explicó que tenían dificultades y mostró a los padres una carta del 28 de septiembre de 2011 de la Consejería de Agricultura dirigida a la Consejería de Educación para que dejasen las agencias de educación de emitir documentos prohibiendo que en los comedores escolares se usase aceite alimentario de productos transgénicos. De nuevo, el Ministerio de Agricultura se niega a mostrar esa carta y ofrece como excusa que se trata de información confidencial.
Problemas con otros transgénicos y la legislación sobre bioseguridad en general
En la petición también se acusa a Luo Yun-bo y Huang Kun-lun, presidente y profesor respectivamente de laUniversidad de Ingeniería de la Nutrición y Ciencias de la Alimentación, y Zhang Qi-fa, académico de la Universidad de Agricultura de Huazhong, por el uso de una toxina natural de las bacterias Bt en lugar de la proteína Bt transgénica para llevar a cabo “una prueba falsa con una muestra fraudulenta para obtener las conclusiones de seguridad”. En el artículo publicado ( en chino) “Análisis de la microbiota intestinal en ratones alimentados con proteína Cry1C en ensayos de toxicidad agua por vía oral”, se demostró que la “proteína Cry1C provoca daños en la salud”. Pero los autores, concluyeron de forma fraudulenta que la “proteína Cry1C es segura para los ratones desde el punto de vista de la microbiota intestinal” y que por lo tanto es seguro consumir arroz transgénico Bt. Esta conclusión está en contra de otras obtenidas en laboratorios de China y de Europa, que la petición va a incluir.
Por último, la petición señala que la legislación de China sobre los transgénicos tiene numerosas lagunas. Los cultivos transgénicos y/o los cultivos híbridos desarrollados a partir del cruce de cultivos transgénicos con cultivos no modificados genéticamente son especies de contrabando en los sistemas de regulación, apareciendo como especies tradicionales o especies híbridas. Dos informaciones emitidas por el Ministerio de Agricultura han confirmado que el Ministerio no sólo permite variedades transgénicas disfrazadas de variedades tradicionales, e híbridos transgénicos sin control, sino que también permite plantas transgénicas con silenciamiento de genes o edición de genes como variedades convencionales, así como otras desarrollados por hibridación de cromosomas.
Un consenso alcanzado entre ex Ministro de Agricultura, Sun Zheng-cai, y Hugh Grant durante su visita al Director General de Monsanto en 2009
La petición alega que ese consenso entre el ex Ministro de Agricultura y Monsanto, durante la visita del Ministro a Estados Unidos, en el Anexo 12 se recoge la respuesta del Ministerio de Agricultura del 1 de abril de 2013, en la que se dice: “ La solicitud para que se revele la información sobre la reunión del ex Ministro de Agricultura, Sun Zheng-cai, con Grant, Director General de Monsanto, durante su visita a Estados Unidos, ha sido recibida”. La respuesta adjunta: “La información que usted requiere no pertenece a la información gubernamental a que se refiere el Reglamento de Divulgación de Información del Gobierno de China”.
Notable deterioro de la salud en China como consecuencia de la importación de soja transgénica
Entre los documentos adjuntos se cita un artículo titulado “Debemos afrontar el daño causado a 1300 millones de personas por la importación de la soja transgénica”, artículo escrito por Mi Zhen-yu, ex Presidente de la Academia Militar de Ciencias, tutor de los cursos de Doctorado y Teniente general, y publicado en Periódico de Tecnología y Ciencia el pasado 25 de abril de 2014 (3). En él se señala el marcado deterioro de la salud pública durante los últimos 10 a 20 años, período que coincide que un rápido aumento en las importaciones de soja transgénica. Los siguientes datos dan una idea de la situación:
- En 1996 la tasa de defectos de nacimiento entre los recién nacidos en China era del 0,87%; en el año 2000 había aumentado al 1,09%; y en el año 2010, al 1,53%.
- Una encuesta publicada por Reference News el 2 de junio de 2013 mostraba que la tasa de depresión severa en las personas mayores de 60 años en China era muy alta, en torno al 40%.
- En el Evening News Xinmin se informaba el 22 de noviembre de 2011 que la tasa de pubertad precoz en las niñas chinas había aumentado 10 veces en los últimos 10 años.
- En el Primer Libro Blanco de la Salud Pública, publicado por el Gobierno Municipal de Beijing en 2010, se revelaba que la diabetes tipo II se había incrementado en 11,7 veces.
- En el Zhengzhou Daily News se informaba el 2 de abril de 2013 que el número de niños con autismo había aumentado 100 veces durante los últimos 20 años.
- En el diario Chengdu se informaba el 20 de febrero de 2013 que la prevalencia de cáncer infantil está aumentando, con un promedio de un caso cada 10.000 niños. Entre los pacientes juveniles con cáncer, la leucemia, los tumores cerebrales, el linfoma maligno o nueroblastoma, son los 4 tipos de cáncer más frecuentes.
- La Encuesta de 2012 sobre la calidad del esperma masculino de los chinos, realizada por China Population Association, informaba que el número total de pacientes con infertilidad en China ya superaba los 50 millones, lo que representa el 15,6% de la población en edad de procrear. Hace diez años, en 2002, esta cifra era del 8%, y hace 20 años, en 1992, era del 3%; hace 40 años, durante la década de 1970, la infertilidad no superaba el 1%.
- De acuerdo con un Informe del sitio web Xinhua, la prevalencia de pacientes con Parkinson en China ha aumentado más de 20 veces durante los últimos 20 años.
- En la actualidad, la prevalencia de enfermedades cardiovasculares ha superado el 13%; y la prevalencia de la enfermedad renal crónica ha alcanzado el 10%.
Estas cifras nos recuerdan el incremento en la prevalencia de 22 enfermedades en Estados Unidos paralelamente al incremento en el uso de los transgénicos y el glifosato (véase [4,5] Estudio estadounidense establece una posible correlación entre el aumento de las enfermedades crónicas y el incremento en el uso del glifosato y de los cultivos transgénicos, SiS 65). Cifras similares de defectos de nacimientos y de cáncer en Argentina se han observado con el aumento en el cultivo de la soja transgénica (6) (Devastating Impacts of Glyphosate Use with GMO Seeds in Argentina, SiS 66). China, de ninguna manera, es el único país que está siendo envenenado por los herbicidas a base de glifosato y por los transgénicos.
Referencias:
- The petition letter submitted by over six hundred individuals from different fields and locations in China to the State Council Legislative Affairs Office regarding revisions proposed by the Ministry of Agriculture to their “Agricultural GMOs Safety Evaluation Administration Methods”, submitted on May 23, 2015, English translation: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/china_
petition_and_attachments.php - Ho MW. How grain self-sufficiency, massive GM soybean imports and glyphosate exports led China to devastate people and planet. Science in Society 67 (to appear) 2015.
- “We Must Face the harm caused by imported GM soybeans to 1.3 billion Chinese people”, Mi Zhen-yu,Science & Technology Abstracts Newspaper, 25 April 2014, http://t.cn/8skNH8S
- Swanson NL, Leu A, Abrahamson J and Wallet B. Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate and the deterioration of health in the United States of America. Journal of Organic Systems 2014, 9, 6-37.
- Saunders PT. Marked deterioration of public health parallels increase in GM crops and glyphosate use, US government data show. Science in Society 65
- Ávila-Vázquez M. Devastating impacts of glyphosate use with GMO seeds in Argentina. Science in Society 66
Contacto personal:
Yang Xiao-lu email: yanfanfzhou99@126.com
Solicitantes:
Chen I-wan (former advisor, Committee of Disaster History, China Disaster Prevention Association)
Yang Xiao-lu (Beijing food safety volunteer)
Zi Ai-chu (old CPC party member)
Bao Feng (Hefei University retired teacher)
and names/positions of over 600 petitioners (herewith omitted) from different fields and regions of China
——————————
Los 23 Anexos (los 4 primeros en inglés)
Anexo1: During the process whereby Monsanto obtained the “pesticide registration” for Roundup in 1988, Monsanto cheated the Chinese government and Chinese people in four aspects.
Anexo2: Thirteen studies by Chinese researchers reveal that glyphosate damages protein and lipids, causes cell apoptosis and necrosis, shows obvious damage to liver cells, is mutagenic, causes reproductive toxicity, and has strong ability to cause birth defects.
Anexo3: Forty six studies by overseas scholars found that glyphosate or glyphosate formulated herbicides cause cell toxicity, DNA damage, teratogenic, mutagenic, and reproductive toxicity, along with miscarriage.
Anexo4: Seventeen studies show evidence that glyphosate is an Endocrine Disrupting Chemical (EDC).
Anexo5: During the process of obtaining the “bio-safety certificate” for glyphosate-tolerant GM soybean 40-3-2 and maize NK603, the leaders of the Ministry of Agriculture, China CDC and Monsanto colluded internally and externally used “fake samples, falsified tests, and made false safety conclusions” to cheat the Chinese government and Chinese people. http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/
Anexo6: The Ministry of Agriculture officials, colluding with Monsanto, rapidly approved the “bio-safety certificates” for insect-resistant soybean MON87701 and double stacked insect-resistant/glyphosate-
Anexo7: The Ministry of Health government disclosure application response issued on Nov. 18 2011 confirms that they have “never accepted or approved” applications to process food oil from the Monsanto glyphosate-tolerant GM soybean 40-3-2 nor such applications to process them by chemical extraction process. http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/
Anexo8: The Ministry of Agriculture government disclosure application response issued on June 27 2014 confirms that they have not evaluated nor approved the production and sales of food oil and soybean protein powder processed from Monsanto glyphosate-tolerant GM soybeans.
Anexo9: On Aug. 1, 2012, the government information disclosure application response issued by the Ministry of Agriculture stated: “The official letter issued by our Ministry on Sep 28 2011 is a ‘confidential’ document, according to the PRC Government Information Disclosure Regulation and concerned stipulations, shall not be disclosed.”http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/
Anexo10: “We Must Face the harm caused by imported GM soybeans to 1.3 billion Chinese people”by Mi Zhen-yu (Former Vice President, Academy of Military Science, Doctoral tutor, Lieutenant General) published by “Science & Technology Abstracts Newspaper” on April 25, 2014.
Anexo11: The Ministry of Agriculture monopolizes the responsibility of the agricultural GMO bio-safety evaluation and the issuing of “bio-safety certificates”, therefore at the same time undertakes the responsibility of monitoring consumer health effects resulting from such actions. There is very clear correlation between the 1.3 billion Chinese people consuming more and more glyphosate-tolerant GM soybeans, GM canola and the rapid increase of a series of malignant diseases during the past ten years, but the Ministry of Agriculture refuses to organize any epidemiological investigation.
Anexo12: The Ministry of Agriculture refuses to disclose contents of “the consensus reached by Minister Sun Zheng-cai when he met President Grant during his visit to USA in 2009.”
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/
Anexo13: When Monsanto applied for the “bio-safety certificate for glyphosate-tolerant GM soybeans and maize, Monsanto purposely did not inform the Ministry of Agriculture that glyphose is a powerful, wide-spectrum biocide/antibiotic. http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/
Anexo14: When Monsanto applied for the “bio-safety certificate” for their glyphosate-tolerant soybean in 2003, Monsanto purposely did not inform the Ministry of Agriculture that glyphosate residue is acaricide, arthropodicide, insecticide, molluscicide, rodenticide! http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/
Anexo15: Luo Yun-bo, President, Huang Kun-lun, Professor (Food Science & Nutrition Engineering College of China Agriculture), and Zhang Qi-fa, Academician (Huazhong Agriculture University) carried out a test using a “natural bacteria cultured Bt protein toxin,” essentially different from the “GM Bt protein toxin”; this constitutes a false test with a fake sample to falsify a conclusion of safety.
Anexo16: The observation and measurement results of “Analysis of intestinal microbiota in mice fed with Cry1C protein in acute oral toxicity test,” led by Luo Yun-bo, President, and Huang Kun-lun, Professor, clearly prove that Cry1C protein harms health. Yet they falsely concluded, “Cry1C protein is safe for mice from the point of intestinal microbiota,” to support the lie that GM Bt rice is “safe to eat.” http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/
Anexo17: “Unintended compositional changes in transgenic rice seeds (Oryza sativa L.) studied by spectral and chromatographic analysis coupled with chemometrics methods” by A Zhongshan University team published in Feb 2010 by JournalAgric Food Chem. It reveals significant changes in nutritional contents of the GM Bt rice developed by academician Zhang Qi-fa compared with the corresponding non-GM rice species, which are harmful and not beneficial to human health. http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/
Anexo18: Three GM Bt rice fed rat studies by three different Chinese universities show that GM Bt rice is harmful to health: “Small intestine slices shows intestinal gland of experimental mice develops lesions and hyperplasia”; “A small number of haematology indices and viscera coefficient index are significant difference … compared with controls [including] testis cell cycle, reproductive organ viscera coefficient “; “Low dose groups of female mice: mononuclear cell count … mean platelet volume … significantly lower than controls; … Low dose groups of male mice: Aspartate aminotransferase significant lower than controls.” http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/
Anexo19: Three separate GM Bt rice 90 day feeding rat toxicology studies by three different European teams (including one team that cooperated with Chinese scholars of the Zhejiang University) also showed that GM Bt rice is harmful: GM fed group drank significantly more water; differ in blood biochemistry, immune response and in intestinal bacterial colonies (GM fed group coliform bacteria levels 23% higher than controls). There were also differences in the weight of male organ, the adrenal gland, the testicle and uterus. http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/
Anexo20: Overseas studies prove that the Bt toxin produced by GM Bt crops, or glyphosate residue contained in glyphosate-tolerant GM crops, alone or together, even if very low dosage, significantly affect the development of human embryonic kidney cells. Before organizing similar toxicology tests by independent institutions, there is no reason to consider that the GM Bt protein toxins produced by GM Bt rice do not cause similar consequences.
Anexo21: “Hematotoxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis as spore-crystal strains Cry1Aa, Cry1Ab, Cry1Ac or Cry2Aa in Swiss albino mice” by research team at University of Brasilia published by Journal of Hematology & Thromboembolic Diseases. Bt toxins caused red blood cells to rupture, supporting earlier conclusion by other researchers that GM Bt protein are toxic to mammals. It also exposes the “food safety” toxicology tests by academician Zhang Qi-fa, President Luo Yunbo, and Prof. Huang Kun-lun to support the false claim that GM Bt rice is safe to eat is fraudulent, and a blatant case of academic misconduct!
Anexo22: “Healthy conditions of soil is the precondition for normal growth of crops and sustainable agriculture.” Scholars from the Life & Environment Science College of the Shanghai Normal University and the Resource & Environment College of the Northeast Agriculture University proved that GM Bt rice, GM Bt cotton, and GM Bt maize damage the balance of the microbial colony, i.e. the most critical condition of healthy soil. A study by an environmental science scholar of the Zhongshan University proves: The growing of GM papaya also causes “significant increase of both the numbers and resistance of resistant microorganisms (bacteria, actinomyces and fungi)”, providing important evidence that GM papaya endangers the ecosystem health of the human gut microbial colony and facilitating the development of antibiotic resistant bacteria. http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/
Anexo23: During the “Biosafety International Forum 5th Workshop” in May 2013, a citizen representative pointed out, China’s legislation on GMO exists with many loopholes, http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/
——————————
Procedencia del artículo:
*******
ISIS Report 15/06/15
China's Ministry of Agriculture Accused of Colluding with Monsanto over Glyphosate & GMOs
China’s Ministry of Agriculture accused of allowing Monsanto’s glyphosate-tolerant soybean and maize to flood the Chinese market without safety tests, condoning deception, faked samples, and fabricated safety test report; Chinese citizens are demanding a shakeup of the Ministry Dr Mae-Wan Ho
Add your name to the Independent Scientists Manifesto on Glyphosate calling on governments at all levels to ban glyphosate spraying based on overwhelming evidence of harm here: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Independent_Scientists_Manifesto_on_Glyphosate.php
Please circulate widely and repost, but you must give the URL of the original and preserve all the links back to articles on our website. If you find this report useful, please support ISIS by subscribing to our magazine Science in Society, and encourage your friends to do so. Or have a look at the ISIS bookstore for other publications
Chinese citizens petition government legislative office demanding ‘shakeup’ of Ministry of Agriculture
A petition signed by more than 600 people all over China submitted to the State Council Legislative Affairs Office alleges that the Ministry of Agriculture has allowed Monsanto’ glyphosate-tolerant GM soy, maize and canola products that cause systematic harm to “mankind, animals, plants, microbes and the ecological environment” to flood the Chinese market without proper assurance that the products are safe [1]. On the contrary, the Ministry has “colluded” with Monsanto, allowing the company to provide “fake samples”, to carry out “false tests” and “falsify safety conclusions”.
The petition says the Ministry of Agriculture and the China Disease Control & Prevention Center, in partnership with Monsanto, have “cheated” the Chinese government and Chinese people, and seriously violated the State Council’s “Agricultural GMOs Safety Administration Regulation”, amounting to a “crime of endangering public security.” (The “Agricultural GMOs Safety Administration Regulation” makes clear that “Agricultural GMO safety stated by this regulation is intended to prevent the danger or potential danger caused by GMOs to mankind, animals, plants, microbes and the ecological environment.”) China, as party to the United Nation’s Convention on Biodiversity and its Cartagena Biosafety Protocol, should strictly implement the Protocol, which stipulates that lack of scientific certainly regarding the potential adverse effects of a GMO on health and the environment shall not prevent the importing party from taking appropriate action to minimize the adverse effects. The Ministry of Agriculture has “blatantly violated” those stipulations of the Protocol.
Most controversially, the petition states: “We must therefore perform a cancer-like surgery: first investigate the extent of collusion between officials in the Ministry of Agriculture and Monsanto in cheating the Chinese government and the Chinese people; second carry out a shakeup and reorganization of the leadership of the ministry; and third, establish new leadership with a clear understanding that ecological agriculture is the only correct sustainable development direction for China’s agriculture..”
And, furthermore, “we cannot exclude the possibility that GMOs could very likely be used by overseas evil forces as a means of bio-warfare” on Chinese people. Therefore, agricultural GMO is a major bio-defence issue, and cannot be regulated, supervised and administered by just one government department such as the Ministry of Agriculture. Instead, it must be placed under a special agency of the National Security Council, together with military medical research institutions undertaking bio-defence and biochemical warfare tasks, and specialists carrying out research in agricultural GMOs, inspection and quarantine, public health, and environmental protection.
The petition includes 23 attachments containing documentary evidence bearing out its allegations of the Ministry of Agriculture’s wrongdoings, four of which are in English, the rest in Chinese. Among the attachments are collections of scientific papers published in Chinese and in English on the toxicities of glyphosate herbicides.
Huge imports of GM soybean contaminated with toxic glyphosate residues
The petition points out that for many years now, China has annually imported 50-70 million tonnes of glyphosate-tolerant GM soybeans contaminated with glyphosate residues (see [2] How Grain Self-Sufficiency, Massive GM Soybean Imports and Glyphosate Exports Led China to Devastate People and Planet, SiS 67) to be extracted chemically into food soil with soybean meal as by-product. The soybean meal is partly processed into animal feed, and partly into soybean protein powder added to sausages, ham, frozen food, soybean milk power, biscuits, cakes, bread and even wheat flour and infant formula milk powder [1]. GM soybean ingredients have been tested and glyphosate residues detected in soy sauce, soy paste, tofu, etc. Soybean and soy products are the GM ingredient consumed the most by the Chinese.
How Monsanto “cheated” to obtain glyphosate and approval of GM soybean and maize
Not only has the Ministry of Agriculture ignored the harm that can be caused by glyphosate residues in the GM soybeans, it has refused to tell the truth on how Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide obtained its pesticide registration in China in 1988, and how Monsanto’s Roundup Ready soybean 40-3-2 and NK603 maize obtained their bio-safety certificate from the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture.
It transpired that for its pesticide registration of Roundup, Monsanto “cheated” the Chinese government and Chinese people. First, Monsanto intentionally did not inform the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture that glyphosate was patented as a chelator, which causes systematic harm to the health of the soil, microbes, crops, animals and humans. Second, Monsanto failed to inform the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture that the US Environment Protection Agency had in 1985 classified glyphosate as a possible carcinogen. Third, Monsanto did not provide reports on the long-term, lifetime and three-generation study revealing the carcinogenicity of glyphosate. And fourth, Monsanto submitted a “Roundup toxicology test report issued by Younger Laboratories on 23 December 1985”, which has all the appearances of being an “outright fraud”. All those wrongdoings are documented in Attachment 1 to the petition.
As for the bio-safety certificate for glyphosate-tolerant GM soybean 40-3-2 and maize NK 603, the petition alleges that the leaders of the Ministry of Agriculture, China’s Centers for Disease Control and Monsanto “colluded internally and externally.” They used “fake samples, falsified tests, and made false safety conclusions”.
First, when Monsanto applied for the bio-safety certificate for its glyphosate tolerant soybeans and maize in 2004, the company did not inform the Ministry of Agriculture that glyphosate is a powerful, wide-spectrum biocide/antibiotic, capable of killing a few hundred species of microbes in animal and human gut flora, and has been patented as such. Monsanto submitted its patent application to the US Patent Office on 29 August 2003, which was granted on 22 April 2004. The patent document stated with regard to the dosage of glyphosate as biocide/antibiotic: “Generally a dosage of as little as about 1-2 milligram (mg) per kilogram (kg) of body weight is suitable.”
Second, when Monsanto applied for the bio-safety certificate for their glyphosate-tolerant soybean in 2003, the company failed to inform the Ministry of Agriculture that glyphosate is also an acaricide, arthropodicide, insecticide, molluscicide, and rodenticide, and patented as such (patent submitted 29 August 2003 to US Patent Office, and patent granted 2004). The “dosage” for use stated in the patent documents: “It includes use in mammals and humans, by injection, orally, anally, intravenously, intramuscular. Generally a dosage of as little as bout 1-2 milligram (mg) per kilogram (kg) of body weight is suitable.”
Third, the Ministry of Agriculture officials allegedly colluded with Monsanto in rapidly approving bio-safety certificates for insect-resistant soybean MON87701 and stacked insect-resistant/glyphosate-tolerant soybean MON87701 x MON89788 (Intacta RR2) without sufficient safety testing; and as revealed by overseas media reports, the rapid approval was to help save Monsanto 600 thousand bags of Intacta RR2 seeds. To avoid public scrutiny of this “lightning approval”, the Ministry of Agriculture has refused to disclose the “food safety” toxicology animal test report for the GM soybean.
Hence, Monsanto and the officials and public scholars of the Ministry of Agriculture are charged with “using dangerous methods to harm public security”, and must be investigated to that effect.
No approval has ever been given for processing chemical extracted GM food oil, chemical extracted GM soybean protein powder added to numerous food produces processed from huge imports of GM soybean
To make matters worse, according to the GM Food Hygiene Management Method implemented 1 July 2002, Article 3 states that GM food must be examined and approved by the Ministry of Health before production or import. But the Ministry of Health in response to application for disclosure on 18 November 2011 confirms that they have “never accepted or approved” applications to process food oil from Monsanto’s glyphosate-tolerant GM soybean 40-3-2, nor applications to process them by chemical extraction.
Similarly, the Ministry of Agriculture in response to application for disclosure issued on 27 June 2014, also confirms that they have not evaluated nor approved the production and sales of food oil and soybean protein powder processed from Monsanto’s glyphosate-tolerant GM soybeans!
School lunches all cooked with chemically extracted GM soybean oil
Yet, school lunches in primary and middle schools in Beijing, paid for by the government, have all been cooked with chemically extracted GM soybean oil. Since early 2011, representatives of student parents and food safety volunteers have approached the Beijing Education Committee, requesting a change to non-GM compressed food oil.
On 12 March 2012, the parents’ representatives were invited to hold discussions with the leaders of one of the departments in the Ministry of Education. During the meeting, the parents’ representatives pointed to official documents issued by the Hangzhou Education Bureau, the Wulumuqi Education Bureau, the Shandong Anqiu Education Bureau, and the Qingdao Food & Drug Supervision and Administration Bureau, requesting that school lunches for students should change to healthy non-GM compressed food oil. But an official of the Education Ministry explained that they “have difficulty”, and showed the parents’ representatives an official letter dated 28 September 2011 from the Ministry of Agriculture to the Ministry of Education, asking them to stop local education bureaus issuing official documents banning school canteens from using GM food oil. Again, the Ministry of Agriculture refuses to disclose this official letter with the excuse that it is a “secret letter”!
Problems with other GMOs and biosafety legislation in general
The petition also charged Luo Yun-bo, and Huang Kun-lun, president and professor respectively of Food Science Nutrition Engineering College of China Agriculture, and Zhang Qi-fa, academician at Huazhong Agriculture University for using a natural bacteria Bt protein toxin instead of the GM Bt protein toxin to carry out “a falsified test with a fake sample to falsify a conclusion of safety.” In their published paper (in Chinese) “Analysis of intestinal microbiota in mice fed with Cry1C protein in acute oral toxicity test”, in fact proved that “Cry1C protein harms health.” But the authors falsely concluded that “Cry1C protein is safe for mice from the point of intestinal microbiota”, and therefore that GM Bt rice is “safe to eat”. This conclusion goes against a host of other findings both from laboratories in China and in Europe that the petition goes on to elaborate.
Finally, the petition points out that China’s legislation on GMO is riddled with loopholes. GM crops and/or hybrid crops developed from crossing GM crops with non-GM crops are “smuggled” through the regulatory system under the guise of traditional species or hybrid species. Two information disclosures issued by the Ministry of Agriculture have confirmed that the Ministry not only allows GM varieties disguised as traditional varieties, and GM hybrids without control, it also allows through as conventional varieties transgenic plants developed with gene silencing or gene editing, as well as those developed by chromosome hybridization.
The “consensus” reached between former Minister of Agriculture Sun Zheng-cai during his visit in 2009 to Monsanto with CEO Grant
The petition alleges that a “consensus” between former Minister of Agriculture and Monsanto during the Minister’s visit to the USA. Attachment 12 contains the response from the Ministry of Agriculture on 1 April 2013 to request for disclosure. It stated: “The application you submitted requesting to disclose the information regarding Sun Zheng-cai, former Minister of Agriculture, meeting with Grant, President of Monsanto during Sun’s visit to USA has been received. Response herewith: The information you require to disclose does not belong to the government information referred to by the PRC Government Information Disclosure Regulation.”
Marked deterioration in China’s public health blamed on import of GM soybean
Among the attachments is quotation from an article entitled “We must face the harm caused by imported GM soybeans to 1.3 billion Chinese people” written by Mi Zhen-yu, former Vice President of Academy of Military Science, Doctoral tutor, and Lieutenant General, and published by Science & Technology Abstracts Newspaper 25 April 2014 [3]. It points to the marked deterioration of public health over the past 10-20 years, coinciding with the rapid increase in imports of GM soybeans. The figures make grim reading.
• In 1996, the rate of birth defects among the newborn in China was 0.87 %; in 2000, it increased to 1.09 %; and in 2010, to 1.53%
• A survey reported by Reference News on June 2, 2013 found the rate of severe depression in people over 60 years old in China is as high as 40 %
• The Xinmin Evening News reported on 22 November 2011 that the rate of precocious puberty in Chinese girls has increased 10-fold over the past 10 years
• The first “Public Health White Paper” issued by the Beijing Municipal Government in 2010 revealed that Type II diabetes has increased 11.7 fold
• The Zhengzhou Daily News reported on 2 April 2013 that the number of children confirmed with autism has increased 100 fold during the past 20 years
• The Chengdu Daily reported on20 February 2013 that the prevalence of childhood cancer is increasing, on average there is one cancer patient for each 10 000 children. Among juvenile cancer patients, leukaemia, brain tumour, malignant lymphoma and neuroblastoma are the top 4.
• The “2012 Chinese male sperm quality survey white paper” of the China Population Association reports that the total number of infertility patients in China already exceeded 50 million, accounting for 15.6 % of the child-bearing age population. Ten years ago in 2002, this figure was 8 %, and 20 years ago in 1992, it was 3 %, 40 years ago during the 1970s, infertility was not more than 1 %
• According to a report by the Xinhua website, the prevalance of Parkinson’s patients in China has increased more than 20-fold during the last 20 years
• Currently, the prevalance ofcardiovascular disease has exceeded 13 %; and prevalence of chronic kindney disease has reached 10 %.
These figures in China echo the increases in 22 diseases in the US that closely parallel the rise in GMOs and glyphosate use [4, 5] (Marked Deterioration of Public Health Parallels Increase in GM Crops and Glyphosate Use, US Government Data Show, SiS 65). Similar upsurges in birth defects and cancers in Argentina have been found as GM soybean cultivation increases [6] (Devastating Impacts of Glyphosate Use with GMO Seeds in Argentina, SiS 66). China is by no means the only country being poisoned by glyphosate herbicides and GMOs.
References
- The petition letter submitted by over six hundred individuals from different fields and locations in China to the State Council Legislative Affairs Office regarding revisions proposed by the Ministry of Agriculture to their “Agricultural GMOs Safety Evaluation Administration Methods”, submitted on May 23, 2015, English translation: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/china_petition_and_attachments.php
- Ho MW. How grain self-sufficiency, massive GM soybean imports and glyphosate exports led China to devastate people and planet. Science in Society 67 (to appear) 2015.
- “We Must Face the harm caused by imported GM soybeans to 1.3 billion Chinese people”, Mi Zhen-yu, Science & Technology Abstracts Newspaper, 25 April 2014, http://t.cn/8skNH8S
- Swanson NL, Leu A, Abrahamson J and Wallet B. Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate and the deterioration of health in the United States of America. Journal of Organic Systems 2014, 9, 6-37.
- Saunders PT. Marked deterioration of public health parallels increase in GM crops and glyphosate use, US government data show.Science in Society 65
- Ávila-Vázquez M. Devastating impacts of glyphosate use with GMO seeds in Argentina. Science in Society 66
Contact Person:
Yang Xiao-lu email: yanfanfzhou99@126.com
Petitioners:
Chen I-wan (former advisor, Committee of Disaster History, China Disaster Prevention Association)
Yang Xiao-lu (Beijing food safety volunteer)
Zi Ai-chu (old CPC party member)
Bao Feng (Hefei University retired teacher)
and names/positions of over 600 petitioners (herewith omitted) from different fields and regions of China
The 23 Attachments (first four in English)
Attachment 1: During the process whereby Monsanto obtained the “pesticide registration” for Roundup in 1988, Monsanto cheated the Chinese government and Chinese people in four aspects.
Attachment 2: Thirteen studies by Chinese researchers reveal that glyphosate damages protein and lipids, causes cell apoptosis and necrosis, shows obvious damage to liver cells, is mutagenic, causes reproductive toxicity, and has strong ability to cause birth defects.
Attachment 3: Forty six studies by overseas scholars found that glyphosate or glyphosate formulated herbicides cause cell toxicity, DNA damage, teratogenic, mutagenic, and reproductive toxicity, along with miscarriage.
Attachment 4: Seventeen studies show evidence that glyphosate is an Endocrine Disrupting Chemical (EDC).
Attachment 5: During the process of obtaining the “bio-safety certificate” for glyphosate-tolerant GM soybean 40-3-2 and maize NK603, the leaders of the Ministry of Agriculture, China CDC and Monsanto colluded internally and externally used “fake samples, falsified tests, and made false safety conclusions” to cheat the Chinese government and Chinese people.http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4bb17e9d0102vk4y.html
Attachment 6: The Ministry of Agriculture officials, colluding with Monsanto, rapidly approved the “bio-safety certificates” for insect-resistant soybean MON87701 and double stacked insect-resistant/glyphosate-tolerant soybean MON87701×MON89788（Intacta RR). This is illegal, having been granted without sufficient safety testing, and, as revealed by overseas media reports, the rapid approval of MON87701×MON89788（Intacta RR2）was to help Monsanto save 600 thousand bags of such seeds.
Attachment 7: The Ministry of Health government disclosure application response issued on Nov. 18 2011 confirms that they have “never accepted or approved” applications to process food oil from the Monsanto glyphosate-tolerant GM soybean 40-3-2 nor such applications to process them by chemical extraction process. http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4bb17e9d0102vk4e.html
Attachment 8: The Ministry of Agriculture government disclosure application response issued on June 27 2014 confirms that they have not evaluated nor approved the production and sales of food oil and soybean protein powder processed from Monsanto glyphosate-tolerant GM soybeans.
Attachment 9: On Aug. 1, 2012, the government information disclosure application response issued by the Ministry of Agriculture stated: “The official letter issued by our Ministry on Sep 28 2011 is a 'confidential' document, according to the PRC Government Information Disclosure Regulation and concerned stipulations, shall not be disclosed.” http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4bb17e9d0102vk3j.html
Attachment 10: “We Must Face the harm caused by imported GM soybeans to 1.3 billion Chinese people”by Mi Zhen-yu (Former Vice President, Academy of Military Science, Doctoral tutor, Lieutenant General) published by "Science & Technology Abstracts Newspaper" on April 25, 2014.
Attachment 11: The Ministry of Agriculture monopolizes the responsibility of the agricultural GMO bio-safety evaluation and the issuing of “bio-safety certificates”, therefore at the same time undertakes the responsibility of monitoring consumer health effects resulting from such actions. There is very clear correlation between the 1.3 billion Chinese people consuming more and more glyphosate-tolerant GM soybeans, GM canola and the rapid increase of a series of malignant diseases during the past ten years, but the Ministry of Agriculture refuses to organize any epidemiological investigation.
Attachment 12: The Ministry of Agriculture refuses to disclose contents of “the consensus reached by Minister Sun Zheng-cai when he met President Grant during his visit to USA in 2009.”
Attachment 13: When Monsanto applied for the “bio-safety certificate for glyphosate-tolerant GM soybeans and maize, Monsanto purposely did not inform the Ministry of Agriculture that glyphose is a powerful, wide-spectrum biocide/antibiotic.http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4bb17e9d0102vkcc.html
Attachment 14: When Monsanto applied for the “bio-safety certificate” for their glyphosate-tolerant soybean in 2003, Monsanto purposely did not inform the Ministry of Agriculture that glyphosate residue is acaricide, arthropodicide, insecticide, molluscicide, rodenticide! http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4bb17e9d0102vkew.html
Attachment 15: Luo Yun-bo, President, Huang Kun-lun, Professor (Food Science & Nutrition Engineering College of China Agriculture), and Zhang Qi-fa, Academician (Huazhong Agriculture University) carried out a test using a “natural bacteria cultured Bt protein toxin,” essentially different from the “GM Bt protein toxin”; this constitutes a false test with a fake sample to falsify a conclusion of safety.
Attachment 16: The observation and measurement results of “Analysis of intestinal microbiota in mice fed with Cry1C protein in acute oral toxicity test,” led by Luo Yun-bo, President, and Huang Kun-lun, Professor, clearly prove that Cry1C protein harms health. Yet they falsely concluded, “Cry1C protein is safe for mice from the point of intestinal microbiota,” to support the lie that GM Bt rice is “safe to eat.” http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4bb17e9d0102vkmm.html
Attachment 17: “Unintended compositional changes in transgenic rice seeds (Oryza sativa L.) studied by spectral and chromatographic analysis coupled with chemometrics methods” by A Zhongshan University team published in Feb 2010 by JournalAgric Food Chem. It reveals significant changes in nutritional contents of the GM Bt rice developed by academician Zhang Qi-fa compared with the corresponding non-GM rice species, which are harmful and not beneficial to human health.http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4bb17e9d0102vkn4.html
Attachment 18: Three GM Bt rice fed rat studies by three different Chinese universities show that GM Bt rice is harmful to health: “Small intestine slices shows intestinal gland of experimental mice develops lesions and hyperplasia”; “A small number of haematology indices and viscera coefficient index are significant difference ... compared with controls [including] testis cell cycle, reproductive organ viscera coefficient “; “Low dose groups of female mice: mononuclear cell count ... mean platelet volume ... significantly lower than controls; ... Low dose groups of male mice: Aspartate aminotransferase significant lower than controls.”http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4bb17e9d0102vknf.html
Attachment 19: Three separate GM Bt rice 90 day feeding rat toxicology studies by three different European teams (including one team that cooperated with Chinese scholars of the Zhejiang University) also showed that GM Bt rice is harmful: GM fed group drank significantly more water; differ in blood biochemistry, immune response and in intestinal bacterial colonies (GM fed group coliform bacteria levels 23% higher than controls). There were also differences in the weight of male organ, the adrenal gland, the testicle and uterus. http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4bb17e9d0102vkni.html
Attachment 20: Overseas studies prove that the Bt toxin produced by GM Bt crops, or glyphosate residue contained in glyphosate-tolerant GM crops, alone or together, even if very low dosage, significantly affect the development of human embryonic kidney cells. Before organizing similar toxicology tests by independent institutions, there is no reason to consider that the GM Bt protein toxins produced by GM Bt rice do not cause similar consequences.
Attachment 21: “Hematotoxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis as spore-crystal strains Cry1Aa, Cry1Ab, Cry1Ac or Cry2Aa in Swiss albino mice” by research team at University of Brasilia published by Journal of Hematology & Thromboembolic Diseases. Bt toxins caused red blood cells to rupture, supporting earlier conclusion by other researchers that GM Bt protein are toxic to mammals. It also exposes the “food safety” toxicology tests by academician Zhang Qi-fa, President Luo Yunbo, and Prof. Huang Kun-lun to support the false claim that GM Bt rice is safe to eat is fraudulent, and a blatant case of academic misconduct!
Attachment 22: “Healthy conditions of soil is the precondition for normal growth of crops and sustainable agriculture.” Scholars from the Life & Environment Science College of the Shanghai Normal University and the Resource & Environment College of the Northeast Agriculture University proved that GM Bt rice, GM Bt cotton, and GM Bt maize damage the balance of the microbial colony, i.e. the most critical condition of healthy soil. A study by an environmental science scholar of the Zhongshan University proves: The growing of GM papaya also causes “significant increase of both the numbers and resistance of resistant microorganisms (bacteria, actinomyces and fungi)”, providing important evidence that GM papaya endangers the ecosystem health of the human gut microbial colony and facilitating the development of antibiotic resistant bacteria. http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4bb17e9d0102vko6.html
Attachment 23: During the "Biosafety International Forum 5th Workshop" in May 2013, a citizen representative pointed out, China's legislation on GMO exists with many loopholes, http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4bb17e9d0102vkp7.html
| There are 1 comments on this article so far. Add your comment |
| Brian Sandle Comment left 16th June 2015 07:07:03 The Chinese Military reported a year ago they would no longer use GMO food. China has leased land in Ukraine to grow non-GMO food and it has to be considered that the associated burning of fields in the Ukraine war may be intended to stop that and keep up the GMO market. |
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario