It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Researchers said there were no differences seen between pigs fed the GM and non-GM diets for feed intake, weight gain, mortality, and routine blood biochemistry measurements.
But those pigs that ate the GM diet had a higher rate of severe stomach inflammation — 32 percent of GM-fed pigs compared to 12 percent of non-GM-fed pigs. The inflammation was worse in GM-fed males compared to non-GM fed males by a factor of 4.0, and GM-fed females compared to non-GM-fed females by a factor of 2.2. As well, GM-fed pigs had uteri that were 25 percent heavier than non-GM fed pigs, the study said.
Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by Philippines
Stomach inflammation? No more detail than that? I take it we are actually talking about the organ, the stomach? Surely there must be some reason for the inflammation which can be tested for by running a metric ton of blood examinations, and testing chunks of the stomach, lining, and all exits and entries in and out of the stomach too? There must be more to whats happening to these pigs which would explain the inflammation.
It is unacceptable that more has not been done to find out what precise medical cause the inflammation has.
One explanation for the inflammation results could lie with the Cry 3Bb1 and Cry 1Ab proteins that these GM corn varieties are engineered to produce. They act as insecticides by inducing pore formation and disintegration of the gut tissue (Spok et al., 2007) of certain grubs that attack corn plants. It has been argued that these proteins cannot harm the gastrointestinal tract of mammals because mammals lack the necessary gut environment and receptors (ANZFA, 2000). However, Vazquez-Padron et al. (2000) found six proteins in the mouse small intestine that could bind to a Cry protein (Cry 1Ac). Furthermore, when the Cry protein bound to these proteins, it resulted in hyperpolarisation of the intestine, which is consistent with the formation of cationic channels, as occurs in the insect gut (Vazquez-Padron et al., 2000). In addition, an independent in vivo study found structural changes and hyperplasia in the ileum of mice fed a Cry protein for two weeks (Fares & El-Sayed, 1998). Chowdhury et al. (2003) and Walsh et al. (2012b) found the Cry1Ab protein (which was present in the feed in our study) throughout the digestive tract of pigs. Chowdhury et al. (2003) found the protein (and sections of the gene that codes for it) in the stomach, duodenum, ileum, caecum and rectum of pigs fed Bt11 corn for four weeks, while Walsh et al. (2012b) found the protein in the stomach, caecum and colon of pigs fed MON810 corn for 110 days (they appear not to have looked in the rectum), indicating that this protein is resistant to digestion in pigs. In our study, stomach inflammation may be due to one or both of the Cry proteins fed in the study and future studies may provide answers.
Conclusion
Pigs fed a GMO diet exhibited heavier uteri and a higher rate of severe stomach inflammation than pigs fed a comparable non-GMO diet. Given the widespread use of GMO feed for livestock as well as humans this is a cause for concern. The results indicate that it would be prudent for GM crops that are destined for human food and animal feed, including stacked GM crops, to undergo long-term animal feeding studies preferably before commercial planting, particularly for toxicological and reproductive effects. Humans have a similar gastrointestinal tract to pigs, and these GM crops are widely consumed by people, particularly in the USA, so it would be be prudent to determine if the findings of this study are applicable to humans.
gmojudycarman.org...
there should be no phenotypical variation between the GM and non-GM varieties used in this study that could influence the outcomes measured in this study.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Soy research is complicated because there’s considerable variation in isoflavone exposure among people classified as soy consumers. Agronomic factors (such as the soybean cultivar and the environmental conditions under which the crop grew) affect a food’s isoflavone profile, as does the way a soy food is processed.
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest
Originally posted by Phage
A very poorly designed experiment. Let's feed pigs diets from different sources and see what happens. Maybe we can find something.
Animals fed different diets showed different characteristics. Not too surprising really. Were the differences due to the GMO component? No way to tell from the way the experiment was conducted. Apparently there was no actual analysis of the diets. Just an assumption on the part of the experimenters:
gmojudycarman.org...
there should be no phenotypical variation between the GM and non-GM varieties used in this study that could influence the outcomes measured in this study.
An odd statement since there are a number of factors other than genetics involved in phenotypical characteristics in crops. For example, it is known that hormone levels in soybean crops can vary (unrelated to the GMO factor).www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Soy research is complicated because there’s considerable variation in isoflavone exposure among people classified as soy consumers. Agronomic factors (such as the soybean cultivar and the environmental conditions under which the crop grew) affect a food’s isoflavone profile, as does the way a soy food is processed.
An interesting "Conflict of Interest Statement" in the report too.
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest
That's a pretty odd thing to see in a scientific article. Pre-emptive denial?
But right after that it says funding came from Verity Farms. Verity Farms is quite openly anti-GMO,
I see no indication that normal variation was accounted for in the statistical analysis but I do see that the non-GMO fed animals had more stomach inflammation overall than the GMO fed animals.
edit on 6/15/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Phage
A very poorly designed experiment. Let's feed pigs diets from different sources and see what happens. Maybe we can find something.
The biggest problem with GMO foods is that we simply don't know either way whether they cause harm or not.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by markosity1973
The biggest problem with GMO foods is that we simply don't know either way whether they cause harm or not.
Can you explain why there is any reason to think that GMO foods might cause harm?
Re-analysis of experiments on chickens and on rats fed Chardon LL GM maize suggest that, contrary to the official conclusions, at least some individual animals do not gain weight as rapidly as they should when given a diet including GM feed. Furthermore, there appear to be irregularities in the feeding habits of at least some animals given GM feed. In the experiment on chickens, mortality was twice as high among those fed the GM maize as among those fed non-GM maize. Existing scientific evidence indicates that farm animals prefer organically produced over conventionally produced feed; while a substantial amount of anecdotal evidence on both domestic and wild animals indicates that, given a choice, they will avoid GM feed and, if forced to eat GM feed, they do not thrive.