As I understand it, the bill would make biotech research funding available to developing countries should they choose to want to do research in this area. Monsanto would not benefit directly from this but as we obviously support ag biotech, we support positive developments in biotech and giving countries who could benefit from it the choice in exploring the technology and the benefits that it may offer their citizens.

Others such as the Center for Food Safety, (who I believe you are affilliated with Deborah?) have been lobbying against this inclusion in the Bill. CFS would not be directly harmed by the legislation, but are still active in opposing it.

Our support does not make it our Dream Bill. This is just our democratic process in action – interested parties weigh in with their opinion.

Not bing accredited does not make them wrong, but it does certainly bring their credibility (note tha “accredited” and “credibility” have a common root. AEEM’s opinions are in conflict with the AMA and any number of accredited organizations. Certainly any reasonable person would conclude thatAEEM’s and their opinions suffer on the credibility scale.

Monsanto does, however, mention lobbying on Senate Bill 384—the so-called Global Food Security Act—which would gear U.S. foreign aid policy to promote GMO seeds in developing countries, according to gristmill.
******************
Bill 384 provisions:

As for the language about GMOs and biotech, the bill amends Section 103A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to read:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-384
(4) include research on biotechnological advances appropriate to local ecological conditions, including genetically modified technology.

May 28, 2009 at 9:35 am
The fact that no outside organization has accredited them makes them a non-accredited organization.

******************

But it does not necessarily make them wrong.

The studies it relied upon to make its claims have been refuted by numerous organizations.

AEEM’s previous work on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity has been shown to be flawed. Their rationale on a moratorium on GMO foods is equally flawed and in conflict with legitimate scientific and regulatory bodies worldwide.

Now an accredited group comes out with some of the most scathing information. I cant wait to see how mansanto tries to tell everyone that this group is a bunch of crazies too..

HERE IS SOME FOOD FOR THOUGHT!!!!!!!

F. William Engdahl
Global Research,
Friday, May 22, 2009

US Doctors’ association calls for Moratorium on GMO Foods

The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) has just issued a call for an immediate moratorium on Genetically Manipulated (GMO) Foods.

In a just-released position paper on GMO foods, the AAEM states that ‘GM foods pose a serious health risk’ and calls for a moratorium on GMO foods. Citing several animal studies, the AAEM concludes ‘there is more than a casual association between GMO foods and adverse health effects’ and that ‘GM foods pose a serious health risk in the areas of toxicology, allergy and immune function, reproductive health, and metabolic, physiologic and genetic health.’ The report is a devastating blow to the multibillion dollar international agribusiness industry, most especially to Monsanto Corporation, the world’s leading purveyor of GMO seeds and related herbicides.

In a press release dated May 19, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, which describes itself as ‘an international association of physicians and other professionals dedicated to addressing the clinical aspects of environmental health,’ called immediately for the following emergency measures to be taken regarding human consumption of GMO foods:

* A moratorium on GMO food; implementation of immediate long term safety testing and labelling of GMO food.

* Physicians to educate their patients, the medical community and the public to avoid GMO foods.

* Physicians to consider the role of GMO foods in their patients’ disease processes.

* More independent long term scientific studies to begin gathering data to investigate the role of GMO foods on human health.

The AAEM chairperson, Dr Amy Dean notes that ‘Multiple animal studies have shown that GM foods cause damage to various organ systems in the body. With this mounting evidence, it is imperative to have a moratorium on GM foods for the safety of our patients’ and the public’s health.’ The President of the AAEM, Dr Jennifer Armstrong stressed that ‘Physicians are probably seeing the effects in their patients, but need to know how to ask the right questions. The most common foods in North America which are consumed that are GMO are corn, soy, canola, and cottonseed oil.’ The AAEM’s position paper on Genetically Modified foods can be found at http:aaemonline.org.

The paper further states that Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) technology ‘abrogates natural reproductive processes, selection occurs at the single cell level, the procedure is highly mutagenic and routinely breeches genera barriers, and the technique has only been used commercially for 10 years.’

The AAEM paper further states, ‘several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food consumption including infertility, immune dysregulation, accelerated aging, dysregulation of genes associated with cholesterol synthesis, insulin regulation, cell signalling, and protein formation, and changes in the liver, kidney, spleen and gastrointestinal system.’

They add, ‘There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation as defined by Hill’s Criteria in the areas of strength of association, consistency, specificity, biological gradient, and biological plausibility. The strength of association and consistency between GM foods and disease is confirmed in several animal studies.’

GMO is toxic

The AAEM paper should give grounds for official rethinking of the current quasi laissez faire regulatory stance to GMO in which the solemn word of the GMO seed companies such as Monsanto is regarded as scientifically valid proof of safety. The AAEM study is worth citing in detail in this regard:

‘Specificity of the association of GM foods and specific disease processes is also supported. Multiple animal studies show significant immune dysregulation, including upregulation of cytokines associated with asthma, allergy, and inflammation. Animal studies also show altered structure and function of the liver, including altered lipid and carbohydrate metabolism as well as cellular changes that could lead to accelerated aging and possibly lead to the accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Changes in the kidney, pancreas and spleen have also been documented. A recent 2008 study links GM corn with infertility, showing a significant decrease in offspring over time and significantly lower litter weight in mice fed GM corn. This study also found that over 400 genes were found to be expressed differently in the mice fed GM corn. These are genes known to control protein synthesis and modification, cell signalling, cholesterol synthesis, and insulin regulation. Studies also show intestinal damage in animals fed GM foods, including proliferative cell growth and disruption of the intestinal immune system. ‘

Aspartame – considered safe in 90 countries globally (scientific evidence shows it to be safe)

Saccharin – safe, no longer requires labelling. (scientific evidence shows it to be safe)

Agent Orange – brought to you by… the US government (and manufactured by Monsanto and other chemical companies by order of said US government) – and discussed here :-

http://blog.monsantoblog.com/2009/04/27/agent-orange-and-monsanto/