Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oral Roberts who wrote (104121)	5/15/2005 3:28:26 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Does it worry you that Canada and Europe both have banned rBGH? It worries me. " rBGH was never properly tested before FDA allowed it on the market. A standard cancer test of a new human drug requires two years of testing with several hundred rats. But rBGH was tested for only 90 days on 30 rats. This short-term rat study was submitted to FDA but was never published. FDA has refused to allow anyone outside FDA to review the raw data from this study, saying it would "irreparably harm" Monsanto.[2] Therefore the linchpin study of cancer and rBGH has never been subjected to open scientific peer review. Some Florida dairy herds grew sick shortly after starting rBGH treatment. One farmer, Charles Knight—who lost 75% of his herd—says on camera that Monsanto and Monsanto-funded researchers at University of Florida withheld from him the information that other dairy herds were suffering similar problems. He says Monsanto and the university researchers told him only that he must be doing something wrong. The law required Monsanto to notify the FDA if they received complaints by dairy farmers such as Charles Knight. But four months after Knight complained to Monsanto, FDA had heard nothing from Monsanto. Monsanto's explanation? Despite a series of visits to Knight's farm, and many phone conversations, Monsanto officials say it took them four months to figure out that Knight was complaining about rBGH. Monsanto claims on camera that every truckload of milk is tested for excessive antibiotics—but Florida dairy officials and scientists on camera say this is simply not true. Monsanto says on camera that Canada's ban on rBGH has nothing to do with human health concerns—but Canadian government officials speaking on camera say just the opposite. Canadian government officials, speaking on camera, say they believe Monsanto tried to bribe them with offers of $1 to $2 million to gain approval for rBGH in Canada. Monsanto officials say the Canadians misunderstood their offer of "research" funds. Monsanto officials claim on camera that "the milk has not changed" because of rBGH treatment of cows. As noted earlier, there is abundant evidence—some of it from Monsanto's own studies—that this is definitely not true. On camera, a Monsanto official claims that Monsanto has not opposed dairy co-ops labeling their milk as "rBGH-free." But this is definitely not true. Monsanto brought two lawsuits against dairies that labeled their milk "rBGH-free." Faced with the Monsanto legal juggernaut, the dairies folded and Monsanto then sent letters around to other dairy organizations announcing the outcome of the two lawsuits—in all likelihood, for purposes of intimidation. (Conveniently, the FDA regulations that discourage labeling of milk as "rBGH-free" were written by Michael Taylor, an attorney who worked for Monsanto both before and after his tenure as an FDA official. See REHW #381.) At the web site www.foxbghsuit.com, you will find the version of the Wilson/Akre rBGH series as it was re-written by Fox's attorneys. It has been laundered and perfumed. Most importantly, nearly all of the references to cancer have been removed from the script. Instead of cancer we now have "human health effects"—whatever those may be." ethicalinvesting.com The increase of the hormones in the milk seems very suspect to me.

To: Oral Roberts who wrote (104121)	5/15/2005 11:08:50 PM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

I didn't say I knew more than people who had grown up on farms. But it is easy to do research about the way farm animals are treated on the web, and much of it is scientific and footnoted. I am not attacking you or the way you farm, and so I am not at all clear why you think I am arrogant. People who do not farm have a vested intereste in making sure their food is healthy, that the environment is not degraded, and that animals are treated humanely. Anyone can drive around the countryside and see cows who look healthy grazing near the road. Now what do you think might be wrong with this particular cow's udders? factoryfarming.com