Genetically modified food: What’s it doing to humans?

Farmer discovers that his GMO corn contains Estrogen-mimicking compounds, causes false pregnancies in animals.

by Green Monkey

“This is bothering our pigs, bothering our cows: what’s it doing to humans?”

A self-described former “cutting edge, “advanced technology” American farmer fed GMO corn to his pigs; they all became sterile forcing the farmer into bankruptcy.

A couple of interesting quotes by farmer Jerry Rossman taken from the Youtube video above:

@7:28 – I was put in connection with this work done out of Baylor (i.e. Baylor University /GM), and I mean it said right in there that this is what would happen; this is the concerns; they had isolated these compounds off of food products they had gotten out of grocery store shelves already – that this was already out here. The humans were eating it, and they had identified it as being an estrogen mimicker. That is what we’ve been working with here.

@8:17 – But as we went along through this, we come to find out that basically the seed industry is not testing – they’ve done absolutely no long term feeding trials with any livestock, and they absolutely resist even the idea of doing it.

Is it an incident isolated to Iowa?

“Austrian scientists fed mice over a course of 20 weeks a mixture of 33 percent Monsanto GE corn (NK 603 x MON 810) and non-GE corn.

These mice gave birth to less babies and lighter babies in their third and fourth litters. Mice fed on non-GE corn had babies as normal.

These differences are statistically significant.”

From the GreenPeace article No need for condoms – GE corn can do the job

Further Reading at Wikipedia: Genetically modified food


Filed under Agriculture, Barbados, Consumer Issues, Environment

7 responses to “Genetically modified food: What’s it doing to humans?

  1. Fast news is bad news, get the FACTS first

    If i am wrong i am sorry in advance. Maze is what corn came from , so even the corn is a changed in to what you love to eat today. Testing tell us what will happen to the Animals , are we not animals, as i see it goes down the line for even us to change. Less births is what was side about CHURCHS CHICKEN IN THE USA.looking to cut down on birth rates of so called Blacks , the additives on the chicken by the KKK???? ,I was told they mater plan is for 1,000,000,000 people is to died, be killed ,or never born so the rest of the World can go on. The say we are running out of every thing. NWO or NWT..

  2. Green Monkey

    Do we need GM?


    While often speculative claims of potential GM “miracles” win vast amounts of column inches, the non-GM success stories generally get minimal if any reporting in the popular media. Without GM’s often exaggerated crisis narratives and claimed silver bullet solutions, it seems there is no story!

    The biotechnology industry and its PR people are keen to keep it that way, particularly because the non-GM solutions are often way ahead of the work on GM. They also bring none of the uncertainties that surround GM.

    All of this makes keeping track of the many non-GM success stories especially important.

    The GM breakthroughs that never were

    Another reason it’s important is because – thanks to the lack of success with GM “solutions” – non-GM success stories can end up being claimed as GM breakthroughs!

    A classic instance is provided by the UK Government’s former chief scientist, Professor Sir David King, who has repeatedly used non-GM breakthroughs as evidence of why we need to embrace GM. In one case, King claimed a big crop yield increase in Africa was due to GM, when it did not involve the use of any GM technology at all. On another occasion, King claimed a big success for GM flood resistant rice when what he was referring to was in reality a non-GM crop!

    In both cases King was under pressure to provide compelling examples of why GM crops were needed. But far from King’s examples showing why we need to embrace GM, they show the exact opposite, i.e. that we need to stop being distracted by GM and to get the funding and support behind the non-GM solutions to the problems we so badly need to address.

    More at:

  3. Green Monkey

    Sustainable Agriculture Urgently Needed, UN Agencies Say

    A rapid and significant shift from conventional, industrial, monoculture towards sustainable production systems is needed, says a new discussion paper from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) [1]. This follows on the heels of a report by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food Olivier de Schutter demonstrating that agroecology or eco-farming can double food production in entire regions within 10 years while mitigating climate change and alleviating rural poverty [2]. These two new papers confirm what we have found in our comprehensive report released in 2008 [3] (Food Futures Now: *Organic *Sustainable *Fossil Fuel Free , ISIS/TWN publication), which supports our call for a global shift to non-GM sustainable agriculture in 2003 [4] (The Case for A GM-Free Sustainable World, Independent Science Panel Report, ISIS publication).

    Scientists consistently find agroecology can double food production

    De Schutter’s report Agro-ecology and the right to food presented to the UN Human Rights Council on 8 March 2011 draws extensively on recent scientific literature to support its conclusions [2]: “Today’s scientific evidence demonstrates that agroecological methods outperform the use of chemical fertilizers in boosting food production where the hungry live – especially in unfavourable environments.”

    “Agro-ecology mimics nature, not industrial processes. It replaces the external inputs like fertiliser with knowledge of how a combination of plants, trees and animals can enhance productivity of the land,” De Schutter told Stephen Leahy of IPS (Inter Press Service) [5], “Yields went up 214 percent in 44 projects in 20 countries in sub-Saharan Africa using agro-ecological farming techniques over a period of 3 to 10 years… far more than any GM [genetically modified] crop has ever done.” Other recent scientific assessments have shown that small farmers in 57 countries using agro-ecological techniques obtained average yield increases of 80 percent. Africans’ average increases were 116 percent.


    De Shutter said the techniques and benefits of agro-ecology are now well established [5], so his role is to push governments to change policies and support the transformation of food production.

    “Private companies will not invest time and money in practices that cannot be rewarded by patents and which don’t open markets for chemical products or improved seeds,” De Shutter said. “If we don’t radically transform the direction of the global food system, we will never feed the billion who are hungry…Nor will we be able to feed ourselves in the future.” (emphasis added)

  4. Green Monkey

    USDA Scientist: Monsanto’s Roundup Herbicide Damages Soil
    By Tom Philpott

    Monsanto’s real PR headache involves one of its flagship products very much in the here and now: the herbicide Roundup (chemical name: glyphosate), upon which Monsanto has built a highly profitable empire of “Roundup Ready” genetically modified seeds.

    The problem goes beyond the “superweed” phenomenon that I’ve written about recently: the fact that farmers are using so much Roundup, on so much acreage, that weeds are developing resistance to it, forcing farmers to resort to highly toxic “pesticide cocktails.”

    What Roundup is doing aboveground may be a stroll through the meadow compared to its effect below. According to USDA scientist Robert Kremer, who spoke at a conference last week, Roundup may also be damaging soil—a sobering thought, given that it’s applied to hundreds of millions of acres of prime farmland in the United States and South America. Here’s a Reuters account of Kremer’s presentation:

    The heavy use of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide appears to be causing harmful changes in soil and potentially hindering yields of the genetically modified crops that farmers are cultivating, a US government scientist said on Friday. Repeated use of the chemical glyphosate, the key ingredient in Roundup herbicide, impacts the root structure of plants, and 15 years of research indicates that the chemical could be causing fungal root disease, said Bob Kremer, a microbiologist with the US Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Service.

    Now, Kremer has been raising these concerns for a couple of years now—and as Tom Laskaway showed in this 2010 Grist article, the USDA has been downplaying them for just as long. Laskaway asked Kremer’s boss at the Agricultural Research Service, Michael Shannon, to comment on Kremer’s research. According to Laskaway, Shannon “admitted that Kremer’s results are valid, but said that the danger they represent pales in comparison to the superweed threat.”

    So let’s get this straight: The head of the USDA’s crop-research service agrees that Roundup damages soil and thinks the superweed problem is even more troublesome. In the face of these two menaces, you might expect the USDA to intervene to curtail Roundup use. But Shannon meant his statement as a rationale for ignoring Kremer’s work. Meanwhile, the USDA keeps approving new Roundup Ready crops—ensuring that the herbicide’s domain over US farmland will expand dramatically.

    More at:

  5. Green Monkey

    An embedded video of Ralph Nader’s speech at the Nov 22nd, 2011 Green Festival:“Giant Corporate Power is the Central Political Issue of Our Time” is posted at

  6. Pookie

    another boogieman. sigh. must i pay for these uwi degrees ? sigh.

  7. Green Monkey

    Pookie, I would invite you to go and tell that to the US farmer in the video above who went bankrupt and lost his farm after his hogs and cattle went sterile. They became sterile after he fed them on a new variety of GMO corn that he was sure would be safe, so go and tell him that this issue is just another “boogieman” But you didn’t even bother to watch the video did you?

    Maybe you can also tell it to Dr Judy Carman in Australia (who has no affiliation with the UWI):

    Scientist: GM food safety testing is “woefully inadequate”

    According to Judy Carman, Ph.D., very little safety testing is done on genetically modified foods, and when it is done, biotechnology companies conduct minimal testing.

    Dr. Carmen says that more extensive independent testing of GM foods is needed to ensure they are safe. Her recommendations seem prophetic in light of a recent Austrian government study that found reduced fertility in mice fed GM corn.

    Dr. Carman is director of the Institute of Health and Environmental Research, Inc., a non-profit research institute based in Australia focusing on the safety of genetically modified food. She earned a doctorate degree in medicine from the University of Adelaide in the areas of metabolic regulation, nutritional biochemistry, and cancer. She has investigated outbreaks of disease for an Australian state government.